Team Delivery Digest

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false. The description adds that it generates a digest, which is consistent. However, it does not elaborate on behavioral aspects like data freshness or pagination. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

One sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It could be slightly expanded to include parameter hints, but it is not verbose.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should clarify return format. It mentions 'chat-ready summary' but lacks detail on structure or content. With 6 parameters (2 required) and no parameter explanations, the description is incomplete for practical use.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It provides no explanation for the 6 parameters (days, per_page, scope_type, scope_id, output_format, project_sample_limit). This is a critical gap for correct invocation.

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 generates a project or group delivery digest with health signals, blockers, and a chat-ready summary. It distinguishes from siblings like get_group_delivery_overview by adding 'health signals' and 'chat-ready summary'.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., gitlab_get_group_delivery_overview or gitlab_summarize_project_status). The description does not mention when not to use it or provide context for choosing it over similar tools.

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