Get Nirvana Logbook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description itself should disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation by stating it returns data, but does not mention any side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not highly transparent.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, then adds usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the low complexity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is mostly complete. However, it does not describe the output format or fields, which would help the agent interpret results. A slightly more detailed description of what 'completed tasks' includes would improve completeness.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain them. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds value by explaining what is returned.

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 'Returns completed tasks logged in Nirvana (state=7).' The verb 'returns' and resource 'completed tasks' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_inbox' or 'get_later' by focusing on completed tasks.

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?

The description says 'Use this to review what the user finished,' providing clear context for when to use. While it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, the sibling tool list helps differentiate usage.

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