Serialize Workspace Node to Disk YAML

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

Describes return format (parsed object + YAML string), schema diff handling, round-trip UUIDs, and lossiness on cloud-only metadata, adding value beyond annotations that already declare readOnly and idempotent.

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?

Highly concise and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, second gives usage, third details conversion, fourth mentions round-trip and losses. No superfluous text.

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 adequately explains the output (parsed disk-shape object and YAML string), transformation details, and limitations (lossy on cloud-only metadata). Sufficient for an agent to understand tool behavior.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, maintaining baseline score.

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 the tool serializes a workspace node to disk YAML format, distinguishing it from siblings like get_workspace_node (fetch only) and parse_disk_node_to_workspace_body (reverse operation).

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: for editor/local-dev workflows needing disk representation, e.g., to run coa create --dry-run. Also implies alternatives by naming reverse tool.

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