aethis_refine_sections

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world operation, but the description adds the crucial detail that feedback is persisted as a domain-level guidance hint and that discovery re-runs immediately. This explains the non-idempotent persistence and the iteration model, which the annotations alone do not convey.

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 the action and then the when-to-use condition. Slight redundancy between 'immediately re-runs discovery so you can see the effect' and 'Repeat until the section list matches your expectations,' but nothing is wasted.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description explains the iteration loop and what the re-run produces. The sensitive API-key parameters are handled thoroughly in the schema itself, so the description need not repeat them, though it could note that key configuration is required to run.

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%, so the schema already documents domain, feedback, sources, and the key parameters in detail. The description restates that feedback is a 'guidance hint' and that sources are the same documents, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb sequence (add guidance, then re-discover sections) on a specific resource (sections), and the 'refine' scope is distinguishable from the sibling aethis_discover_sections. An agent can tell it apart from a plain discovery call without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit trigger conditions: 'when sections are missing, incorrectly split, or named differently than expected,' plus a termination condition ('repeat until the section list matches your expectations'). It doesn't name aethis_discover_sections as the alternative explicitly, but the context is clear enough.

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