sync

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses key side effects (soft reset, main.py restart), default paths, force/upload-all behavior, and dry-run reporting. It doesn't cover return values or error handling, but the core behavior is well exposed.

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 front-loaded sentences convey the main operation, defaults, and every option without waste. Every clause adds useful information for selecting and invoking the tool.

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?

The description is rich enough for correct invocation: it specifies default folders, flag behavior, and the restart side effect. Minor gaps remain around expected output/return values and error behavior, but no output schema exists to fill that gap.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains force, reset, dry_run, and remote_dir defaults, and implies local_dir via 'default src'. This gives meaningful semantics for nearly all parameters, though local_dir isn't explicitly named.

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 identifies a specific verb and resource: upload a project folder to the board. It further clarifies the mechanism (SHA-256 delta sync) and the post-sync reset, making it clearly distinct from siblings like run_file, write, or reset.

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?

Clear context is provided: this is the tool for syncing a local project folder to the board and restarting main.py. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the intended deployment scenario is unambiguous.

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