uvcs_release_plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' is largely redundant. The one piece of added context is that planning is driven by workspace style rules, but the description never explains what the plan contains or how it feeds the confirm siblings.

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?

A single compact sentence with the key qualifier ('Read-only') front-loaded at the end of the sentence rather than buried. No wasted clauses, though it is arguably too terse for the tool's role.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description is the only place an agent could learn what a 'plan' returns (branch name, label, comment text, version). That return shape is left entirely unspecified, which is a meaningful gap for a 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 all four parameters are already documented, including the releaseType enum and the currentVersion/releaseVersion fallback logic. The description only echoes the major/minor/patch bump concept and adds no format or interplay detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (plan) and concrete outputs (release branch, label, comments) plus the source of the rules (workspace style rules). It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like uvcs_branch_create_prepare, uvcs_label_create_prepare, or uvcs_release_checkout_prepare, which an agent must choose between.

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 statement of when to call this versus the many adjacent prepare/confirm tools, nor any prerequisite (e.g., that style rules must be initialized first). 'Read-only' hints it is a preview step, but the agent must infer that.

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