promote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only 'Export a learning to CLAUDE.md' but does not explain whether this appends or overwrites content, whether it creates missing files, or what happens to the source learning. No side effects or permissions are mentioned.

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 a single sentence, with no redundant words. It immediately states the action and destination, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool mutates a file and has no annotations or output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify important behaviors like idempotency, formatting of the promoted entry, or how 'section' interacts with existing content. Sibling context suggests a workspace but the description doesn't establish how this fits.

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?

The input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'CLAUDE.md' aligns with the target_file parameter but adds no semantic detail beyond the schema. No extra meaning is provided for 'id' or 'section'.

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 uses the specific verb 'Export' and names the resource 'a learning' and destination 'CLAUDE.md', making the tool's function clear. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools, the destination file distinguishes it from 'mistake', 'learned', and 'recall'.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'learned' or 'recall'. There is no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage entirely to inference.

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