it_ops_triage_sdlc_intake

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It mentions JWT, tenant, and company scoping but does not disclose whether the action is read-only or destructive, what side effects occur, or what the response looks like. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 (three sentences) and includes parameter descriptions. It is not verbose, though the first sentence could be more informative about the action's goal. Overall, it is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide enough context for correct invocation. It lacks explanation of the action's business function, expected return values, side effects, and how it differs from similar it_ops tools. The agent is left without key decision-making information.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It describes 'message' as a free-text objective and 'inputs' as an optional JSON string for structured inputs. This provides some context but remains vague; e.g., no details on the expected JSON structure for inputs.

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 it runs the 'triage_sdlc_intake' domain agent action and routes through a dispatcher. The purpose is clear in a technical sense but lacks a user-facing explanation of what the action actually does (e.g., triaging SDLC intake). This makes it moderately clear but not specific enough to fully inform the agent.

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 the many sibling tools (e.g., it_ops_chat, it_ops_analysis_review). The description does not mention contexts, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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