Roadmap Drift

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds valuable context: deterministic, no LLM cost, edge case 'zeroed when nothing was planned or shipped'. Enhances understanding 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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with core output, then behavioral details and usage advice. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 description fully lists return fields (drift score, counts, median slip days, top slipped/unplanned ships) and covers edge case. Complete for an AI agent to understand and use the tool.

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%, but description adds functional context: explains window options with default quarter, product_id optional and from whoami, and clarifies that omitting product_id spans whole org. Provides usage-relevant meaning.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns 'planned vs shipped features over a window' with specific metrics (drift score, counts, median slip days). Distinguishes from siblings by naming a follow-up action with list_features, implying uniqueness in providing drift analysis.

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?

Explicitly recommends using it in 'planning reviews to check delivery against the roadmap' and suggests a next step. Lacks explicit when-not or alternatives, but context is clear.

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