Current Task

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only safety profile is already covered. The description adds value by explaining the 'unified live projection' mechanism and the priority ordering behavior, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 the core purpose. Each sentence earns its place: the first states what and how, the second states the priority rule. Minor efficiency could compress further, but it is appropriately tight.

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?

With full schema coverage, an output schema present, and read-only annotations, the description needs only to explain the high-level read semantics and prioritization, which it does. The priority rule adds behavioral context not capturable in schema, making this sufficiently complete for a read tool.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters (workspace_id, conversation_id, workspace_generation) thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, which is acceptable given full schema coverage. The description's purpose is separate from parameter documentation.

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 verb (Read) and resource (the highest-priority current task across Goal, Durable Job, and Handoff) using the unified live projection. It distinguishes itself from task-related siblings by naming the specific sources it reads and the projection mechanism.

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?

The description establishes clear priority semantics: 'Running and waiting work takes precedence over recent terminal history.' It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives for when not to use this tool, but the precedence rule gives concrete selection context within the task-reading family.

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