beginTransaction

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

The description claims to start a new transaction, a mutation, yet the annotations set readOnlyHint: true. This is a direct contradiction. The description fails to disclose that it creates state, violating behavioral transparency.

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 concise sentences, no fluff. Front-loads the core action and immediately provides essential follow-up context about the return value and usage.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description's mention of returning a transactionId is helpful. However, it lacks details about transaction limits, behavior when a transaction already exists, or error conditions. The contradiction with annotations also undermines completeness.

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 coverage is 100% for the single optional transactionId parameter, with a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, but the baseline is adequate.

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 states 'Start a new multi-file edit transaction' – a specific verb and resource. It also mentions the return value and its use with stageEdit, which distinguishes it from related siblings like commitTransaction and rollbackTransaction.

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?

It clearly indicates when to use this tool ('before subsequent stageEdit calls'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The context is clear enough for a transaction initiation tool.

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