briefing_resolve

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits like idempotency, authorization needs, side effects (e.g., whether the briefing is archived), or error conditions (e.g., invalid briefing_id). This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence that front-loads the action and object. However, it lacks any supporting detail; it is concise but arguably under-specified. Still, it earns a 4 for no wasted words.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values, but it still fails to explain side effects, prerequisites (e.g., user must have permission), or error handling. For a state-changing tool, this leaves significant gaps in understanding.

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% with both parameters documented sufficiently. However, the description adds no additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, e.g., format or expected values for 'resolution' or 'briefing_id'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states it resolves a Leader Briefing item using the user's decision. The verb 'resolve' and object 'Leader Briefing item' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'briefing_dismiss' (dismiss without decision) and 'briefing_add' (add a new item).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'briefing_dismiss' or 'briefing_list'. It does not specify prerequisites, when a resolution is appropriate, or what scenarios call for this tool instead of others.

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