brand_extract_messaging

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that it writes a file (.brand/messaging-audit.md) and returns structured analysis with scores. However, it doesn't explicitly state whether it is idempotent or if it modifies any existing data.

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 is front-loaded with purpose and triggers, and each sentence adds value. It could be slightly more concise by grouping related information, but overall it's well-structured.

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 no output schema, the description does well to explain the return type (structured analysis with scores). It covers the analysis dimensions and output file. However, it lacks mention of error cases or rate limits.

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%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds minor context about `pages` (JSON array, up to 10 pages) but doesn't significantly extend understanding 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 audits how a brand sounds on its website, with specific triggers like 'analyze my voice'. It distinguishes from siblings like brand_compile_messaging by noting the sequential relationship.

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 states when to use based on user phrases and provides clear guidance to run brand_compile_messaging afterward. No confusion about alternatives.

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