Plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the title, such as what planning does, whether it writes anything by default, or how dry_run affects behavior.

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 extremely short but not meaningfully concise; it is under-specified rather than front-loaded with useful information. The trailing fragment '(rm_rollout).' adds little.

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?

Although the schema is rich and an output schema exists, the description is inadequate for a multi-parameter planning tool with closely related apply/status/release siblings. An agent cannot determine from the description alone when to invoke this versus rm_rollout_apply.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters, including dependency, floor, dry_run, and jobs, are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning, which is acceptable at baseline 3 given high schema coverage.

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 'Plan (rm_rollout).' mostly restates the tool name/title and does not state what planning a rollout actually does or how it differs from siblings like rm_rollout_apply, rm_rollout_status, or rm_rollout_release.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus rm_rollout_apply or the other rollout siblings, nor any prerequisite or exclusion information.

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