List, Add, or Resolve Listening Notes

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

The description adds the constraint 'metrics cannot self-approve', which is beyond annotations. Annotations are sparse (no readOnlyHint, etc.), so the description partly compensates but still lacks details on mutation scope, authorization, or rate limits.

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 a single sentence, making it concise but lacking structure. The final clause 'metrics cannot self-approve' breaks flow and is somewhat cryptic. A slightly longer, more organized description would be clearer.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, nested objects, multiple actions, output schema), the description is too minimal. It doesn't explain the different actions, status filtering, or note structure. Sibling tools indicate a rich domain, yet no comparisons are provided.

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 only 33% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to explain key parameters like 'note', 'status', 'resolution', or 'manifest_path'. The phrase 'hash-bound keep/reject/revise evidence' touches on intent_fidelity but is insufficient for the nine parameters.

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?

Description states 'List or persist qualitative listening notes' with specific reference to 'hash-bound keep/reject/revise evidence for phrase intent', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. However, it omits the 'resolve' action from the title, which is a minor gap in completeness.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'vocaloid_review_audio' or other sibling tools. The description does not provide context for choosing between actions or any prerequisites.

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