forge_next

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clarifies that despite the 'next' name, the tool does not advance anything—it 'returns' the current phase and its goal, which implies a read-only, non-mutating operation. It stops short of explicitly stating side effects or prerequisites, but the wording is sufficiently indicative.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core behavior and then provides the direct usage condition, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns and when to call it. It could additionally note behavior when no run is active or when multiple runs exist, but the schema already hints at the single-active-run condition.

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%, so the optional runId parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which places it at the 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 states a specific verb and resource: it 'Returns the CURRENT phase with its detailed goal.' It clarifies exactly what the tool provides and frames it as guidance for 'what to do now,' which distinguishes it from siblings like forge_status and forge_complete_phase.

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 gives an explicit trigger: 'Call this when you are unsure what comes next.' It clearly communicates when the tool should be used, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for exclusions.

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