cubelife_report

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

No annotations provided; description only says 'report state'. It doesn't disclose side effects, idempotency, or what happens after reporting (e.g., logging, overwriting previous state). Minimal but not misleading.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage. No fluff; every word adds value.

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; description doesn't explain expected return or confirmation. Sibling tools exist, but for a report tool, it's minimally adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so description doesn't need to add much. It implicitly ties state to 'current work' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 reports current work state to CubeLife. It specifies when to use it ('when starting a new task or changing activity'), which distinguishes it from siblings like cubelife_complete or cubelife_error.

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?

Explicitly states when to call ('starting a new task or changing activity'). While it doesn't say when not to use, the guidance is clear and sufficient for an agent to decide.

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