Critical path (CPM)

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool computes based on ticket estimates and returns duration chain and slack, but does not mention side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentences with no wasted words. First sentence explains functionality and outputs; second sentence provides usage context and parameter guidance. Perfectly 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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema or nested objects), the description covers purpose, usage, and parameter type. It mentions output (slack, chain) but not format or example. Mostly complete.

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 100% for the single parameter. Description repeats that project_id accepts name, URL slug, or UUID, which matches the schema. No additional semantic enrichment beyond the schema.

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 it computes the critical path via CPM over ticket estimates, defines outputs (longest-duration chain, slack), and explicitly distinguishes it from sibling 'rank_keystones' by contrasting the questions each answers.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs sibling (answers 'what sets total duration' vs 'max leverage unlock'). Also clarifies that project_id accepts name, URL slug, or UUID, aiding correct input. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the contrast is sufficient.

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