content_evolve_strategy

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions routing via dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, mutation behavior, or what changes occur. This is a significant gap for a tool that presumably modifies strategy.

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 short, front-loaded with the action, and avoids unnecessary words. Each sentence adds information (action, routing, parameters), making it efficient.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks crucial context: expected behavior, return value hints, error conditions, or prerequisites. For a domain agent action tool, this is incomplete.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It labels 'message' as free-text objective and 'inputs' as optional JSON string, but provides no format, constraints, or examples. This adds minimal value beyond parameter names.

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 runs the 'evolve_strategy' domain agent action in the content domain, with routing details. It is specific and distinguishes from siblings by referring to a unique action name. However, it does not explain what 'evolve strategy' entails, slightly reducing clarity.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative content tools (e.g., content_generate_plan, content_refine). Lacks any context about appropriate scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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