gardener_apply

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. Description adds rich detail on what each action does (archive, retire, merge, etc.), giving the agent full behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

The description packs a lot of information into one dense paragraph. Could be more scannable with bullet points or clearer separation of actions, but still concise overall.

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?

No output schema, but the description covers behavior well given limited parameters. Missing return value details and error conditions, but sufficient for an agent.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage. Description adds significant value by detailing the effect of each sub-action for the 'action' parameter, which is not present in the enum descriptions.

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 clearly states that the tool resolves a gardener proposal, with detailed explanation of actions (apply with sub-actions like archive, merge, etc., and dismiss). It distinguishes from siblings like gardener_proposals (listing) and gardener_request (requesting).

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?

Provides guidance on using apply vs dismiss, and lists sub-actions of apply. Could explicitly state when to use this versus sibling tools (e.g., first list proposals via gardener_proposals), but overall clear.

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