amplify_promote_pattern

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions prerequisites and effect on scoring, but omits what happens to the per-project pattern after promotion (e.g., is it removed?), whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects. This is incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 front-loads the purpose and then provides conditions and effect. Every sentence contributes value.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, and effect. But it lacks details on error cases, idempotency, and what happens to the original pattern. It is minimally adequate but could be more complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds context about the prerequisite and effect, but does not enhance understanding of the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. No additional parameter details are given.

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 verb 'Promote' and the resource 'pattern_key', specifying the scope change from per-project to global. It is distinct from siblings like 'amplify_global_patterns' which lists global patterns, and 'amplify_learn' which is about learning.

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 gives explicit prerequisites: 'Requires the key to exist in ≥2 projects with ≥1 confirmed lesson.' It also explains the consequence of promotion. However, it does not provide alternative tools for when to not use this tool, but the conditions are clear.

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