devflow_token_emit

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

Discloses that the signed token is returned only once, backend stores only the hash, and advises to keep it in session memory. Explains verification and rejection conditions. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and meets 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?

Every sentence adds unique value. Starts with the core action, then defines terms, then usage context, then integration steps. No redundant phrases. Appropriately sized for the complexity.

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?

Covers the entire lifecycle: when to emit, what the token is, how to pass it later, and conditions for acceptance. Without output schema, description adequately explains return behavior (returned once). Complete for a tool with this complexity.

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?

Adds significant meaning beyond the 100% schema coverage. Explains evidence shapes per skill in detail, clarifies required fields, and ties parameters to the overall workflow. Schema alone would not convey this level of domain-specific context.

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?

Clearly states the tool emits a discipline-token for a flow and skill, differentiating it from sibling tools like devflow_tokens_list or discipline_tokens_auto_emit. Provides specific details about the token being an HMAC-signed proof and its purpose.

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 says 'Use this at the END of a discipline-skill run' and lists applicable skills. Describes the subsequent use in flow_update with conditions. Gives clear when-to-use and how-to-use guidance, including prerequisites for the gate-check.

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