Get velocity recommendation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the return value range (0-120%) and interpretation for different values, as well as window options. However, it does not mention if the operation is read-only or any permissions needed.

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 concise single paragraph with three front-loaded sentences. Each sentence adds essential information without wasted words.

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 one parameter with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and return interpretation. It lacks details on error handling or default behavior but is largely complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 description adds significant meaning to the single parameter 'window' by explaining each enum value ('5h' as rolling 5-hour, 'weekly' as 7-day, 'weekly_opus') beyond the schema's simple description 'Which limit window to evaluate.'

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 it returns a velocity recommendation for one window, with specific meaning for 100%, <100%, and >100%. It distinguishes from sibling 'get_usage' by focusing on recommendation rather than raw usage.

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 getting velocity recommendations for a given window but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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