commitlore_stale

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by defining what 'stale' means (superseded, past Expires:, flagged for review), which goes beyond the annotation. No contradiction; it reinforces the read-only nature by focusing on listing.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose and criteria are front-loaded, and the command equivalence is a concise note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with read-only annotations, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what is returned (stale records) and the criteria. No output schema exists, but the tool's purpose is simple enough that return format is implied.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameters. It appropriately omits parameter details.

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The description clearly states the tool lists stale CommitLore records, with specific criteria (superseded, past Expires:, flagged for review). The verb 'list' and resource 'stale records' are clear. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like commitlore_query, but the specific criteria make it distinct.

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 implies the tool is for viewing stale records but provides no guidance on when to use it versus other tools or when not to use it. The mention of 'Same answer as commitlore stale --json' is a command equivalence, not an alternative selection. No exclusions or context are given.

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