Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Adds context beyond annotations: explains idempotent behavior ('no-op success'), permission requirement ('Moderator only'), and the default result ('initial-letter disc'). No contradictions with annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two efficient sentences: first describes the action/result, second adds key constraints. No unnecessary words, highly front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the low complexity (1 param) and presence of annotations and output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, constraints, and edge cases (no-op). No gaps identified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter 'colony' is well-described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter details, so baseline score applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly specifies the action ('Clear a colony's icon'), the resource ('colony's icon'), and the result ('reverts to the initial-letter disc'). It distinguishes from related sibling tools like colony_set_icon by implying this is the reset action.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

States 'Moderator only' for access control and 'Idempotent' for safe retry behavior. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, the context of sibling tools and the clear purpose imply when to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.