vicem_read_baton

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Reads' correctly signals a non-mutating operation and the drift check is a disclosed behavior beyond the name, but there is no explanation of what drift detection returns, whether drift makes the call fail or merely reports a flag, or what the agent should do with that result.

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 tight sentence with the resource first and the drift check second. No filler, nothing redundant.

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-param read with no output schema, the definition should say roughly what comes back (baton contents, drift status, or an error on drift) and how it relates to vicem_rehydrate. It says what it touches but not what the caller receives or should do with a drift result.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies.

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 and resource ('Reads the current .vicem/BATON.md') plus a secondary behavior ('checks for git HEAD drift'), which clearly separates it from vicem_create_baton. It does not distinguish itself from vicem_check_guard or vicem_rehydrate, which sound adjacent.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus vicem_rehydrate or vicem_check_guard, and no prerequisites or sequencing hints. The agent must infer that this is the cheap way to inspect current state before deciding on other actions.

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