Osiris.Plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. "Manifeste scelle" cryptically implies immutability/sealing of a written plan, which is a genuine behavioral hint, but there is nothing about side effects per mode, whether 'start' persists state, what 'resume' requires, or permissions.

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?

It is a single short line with no filler, and the task label is front-loaded. However, telegraphic fragments and untranslated jargon ("manifeste scelle") make it read as compressed rather than efficiently structured.

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?

A six-parameter, four-mode lifecycle tool with no annotations needs to explain mode-dependent parameter applicability and write semantics; the description does none of that. The output schema covers return values, but the behavioral gap remains large for a stateful planning 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 explains all six parameters (mode, steps, task_id, objective, constraints, context_tokens). The description adds only the mode enumeration, which duplicates the schema, so the 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?

"Tache : plan, manifeste scelle" largely restates the tool name and adds an unexplained metaphor ("sealed manifest"). The mode list (start | update | resume | status) hints at a lifecycle manager, but the description never states a concrete verb+resource or distinguishes it from siblings like osiris.checkpoint or osiris.handoff.

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 four mode names are listed but no condition is given for choosing among them, and no guidance distinguishes this tool from osiris.precheck, osiris.observe, or osiris.checkpoint. An agent must guess which mode and which sibling to use.

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