ecosystem_trigger_debate

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

The description discloses validation and payload return, but does not mention failure handling or side effects. Since no annotations exist, the description carries the full burden; it is adequate but not detailed.

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 multi-sentence but front-loaded with purpose. It is clear and structured as a stage instruction, though could be more concise by removing redundant phrases.

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 provides workflow context (stage number, post-invocation steps) and hints at the output payload. With an output schema available, it does not need to detail return values further, making it fairly complete.

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 only 40% (2 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The description adds context by mentioning 'suggested topic + roles + linked review_ids', which helps infer parameter roles, but does not fully describe each parameter individually.

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 builds a debate dispatch payload and validates repo_ids. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools debate_start and ecosystem_link_debate_meeting by explaining it is a preparatory step.

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?

The description explains it is Stage 2 and that the caller should invoke debate_start after receiving the payload, then call ecosystem_link_debate_meeting. It implies usage context but does not explicitly list prerequisites or when not to use.

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