prepare_review

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

Without annotations, the description explains key behaviors: it returns a structured prompt and signals pool exhaustion with a special value. It does not detail permissions or side effects, but the core behavior is adequately covered.

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 concise at four sentences, front-loading the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, output, AI response format, and error handling. No unnecessary words.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, has output schema), the description covers all necessary information: what it does, what it returns, and how to handle the exhausted pool case. The output schema can detail the structure.

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 schema has 100% coverage and describes the 'dual' parameter. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 prepares a review prompt for today's scan batch. It specifies the output is a structured prompt for the AI to respond with decisions, distinguishing it from siblings like pool_refresh or finalize_review.

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 provides guidance on when to call pool_refresh if the pool is exhausted, indicating a clear condition for alternative use. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use the tool or compare it with other siblings beyond this edge case.

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