Suggest Fix

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds context about returning up to 3 ranked suggestions with source. However, it does not disclose behavior when no results are found or ranking details, leaving some transparency gaps.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every word adds value. No redundancy or unnecessary details.

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 simplicity of the tool and good schema coverage, the description adequately covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. It lacks mention of error handling or edge cases, but these are minor for a suggestion 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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes the parameters well. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, thus baseline score 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 suggests corrective actions for failures by searching lesson DB and prevention rules. It uses a specific verb+resource structure, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'diagnose_failure' or 'search_lessons', though the combination of sources is implied.

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 includes an explicit usage context: 'Call this when something goes wrong and you need guidance on what to do next.' It provides clear when-to-use guidance but does not mention when not to use or alternative tools, meeting the score 4 criteria.

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