knowledge_draft_accept

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

No annotations provided; description reveals side effects (creates ADR/doc_page, marks draft accepted) and commit nature. Lacks details on prerequisites or error states, but sufficient for a simple action.

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?

Three efficient sentences: core action, side effects, usage guidance. No redundancy.

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 purpose, behavior, and usage for a low-complexity tool. Could mention draft state validation but is reasonably complete.

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?

Single parameter 'id' with schema coverage 100%. Description does not add extra meaning beyond 'Draft id', so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states the tool accepts a draft, creates ADR or doc_page, and marks draft accepted. It uses specific verb 'accept' and resource 'draft', and distinguishes from sibling knowledge_draft_reject and knowledge_draft_create.

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 only when you are certain the draft is good to merge' and contrasts with UI usage. Provides clear when-to-use and notes alternative (UI) for non-autonomous workflows.

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