Claim mission lease

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

The annotations only convey mutating, non-idempotent, non-destructive intent. The description adds real behavioral detail: live-lease token requirements, mission_busy for other operations, renewal semantics, and the non-authentication caveat.

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 sentences, each earning its place: the core action, the operational consequences, and the critical caveat. The most decision-relevant fact is front-loaded.

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?

For a five-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the full lifecycle: claiming, expiry, token usage, renewal, and non-authentication. The schema fills in remaining parameter constraints, so nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

With 80% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning to lease_token by explaining renewal and frames identity as a cooperating harness. It does not elaborate on lease_ms, though the schema already supplies its bounds and default.

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 opens with 'Claim a mission for one harness with expiry,' a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also distinguishes this tool from mission_start by explaining that the lease token is required by several downstream operations.

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?

It explicitly names which operations require the token (memory_checkpoint, delegate, consensus, swarm_run, mission_start), says others receive mission_busy, and explains renewal by claiming again. It also gives a key when-not: leases are coordination, not authentication.

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