Mark an item done

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

The description explicitly states 'Nothing is deleted,' which is a valuable behavioral disclosure beyond the schema. It clarifies that the operation is non-destructive, which is important for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 short sentences with no waste. The core action and the key non-destructive behavior are front-loaded.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the effect and the non-destructive nature. It could mention what happens to the item after marking, but that is not essential for calling the tool.

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 schema already documents the 'id' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable given full coverage.

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 ('Mark') and resource ('an item'), and clarifies the effect ('finished so it leaves the shortlist'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like capture and add_project by focusing on the shortlist lifecycle.

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 implies when to use it: when an item should be finished and removed from the shortlist. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a simple tool.

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