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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., whether the snapshot is modified), authorization requirements, or the bounded nature of the output. Lacks transparency for a tool that transforms data.

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?

One sentence that is front-loaded with the main action, but it is somewhat verbose with phrases like 'bounded workspace evidence bundle'. Could be more concise while adding value. Missing critical elements makes it less efficient.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. Does not explain the output format, parameter details, or how it fits with sibling tools. Completely inadequate for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain any parameter meanings. Parameters like 'signals', 'token_budget', 'max_snippet_lines' are left entirely to the schema which has no descriptions. This makes it impossible for an agent to use the tool correctly without external knowledge.

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?

The description uses a specific verb 'triage' and mentions the resources: repository snapshot, workspace evidence bundle, suspect files, and symbols. It gives a clear idea of the tool's function and distinguishes it from siblings like 'run_repository_fix' or 'run_repository_pipeline' by focusing on evidence bundling.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or any context for invocation. The description is purely declarative without usage recommendations.

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