approve_proposal

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: writing to skill.md, creating a backup first, and marking the proposal as approved. It does not mention edge cases like double-approval, but the main effects are covered.

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?

Three sentences plus an args line—every sentence is essential. No fluff, front-loaded with the main verb and resource.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the purpose, input, and side effects. It could mention the return value but an output schema exists.

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 0%; the description adds meaning: 'The numeric ID from get_pending_proposals()' tells the agent the source and type, beyond the schema's integer definition.

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 the action: approve a pending skill improvement proposal and apply it by writing to skill.md. It names the resource (skill.md) and distinguishes from siblings like reject_proposal and get_pending_proposals.

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 tells the agent that proposal_id comes from get_pending_proposals(), implying the tool is used after retrieving pending proposals. While it doesn't explicitly exclude other contexts, the purpose is clear.

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