briefing_add

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

No annotations provided; description only states the action without disclosing side effects, idempotency, or return behavior. As a creation tool, it misses important context like whether previous items are affected or if there are limits.

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 sentences with no fluff: first states purpose, second gives usage guidance. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, behavioral context like prerequisites or error states is missing. Adequate for a simple tool but could be more informative given no annotations.

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 descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond usage context, not enhancing parameter understanding.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Add' and resource 'decision item to Leader Briefing'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like briefing_dismiss and briefing_list by focusing on adding items.

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?

Provides explicit usage scenarios: 'Use when Leader encounters decisions that require user input: project direction, architecture choices, budget/resource allocation.' Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives but is clear.

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