Get Cross-Project Updates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation ('check for updates') but doesn't mention side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The 'acknowledgeAll' parameter suggests it may mutate state, but the description doesn't clarify that acknowledging updates marks them as processed. This is a notable gap.

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?

Two tightly written sentences that front-load the action and follow with usage guidance. No waste.

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 tool has no annotations and a mutation-implying parameter ('acknowledgeAll'), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what acknowledging does, whether it can be undone, or the nature of the updates. An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, but behavioral context is lacking.

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 the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check for updates from other sessions in related projects'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_pending_sync_points (which are sync points, not updates) and query_project_state (which is a state query, not updates). Clear purpose.

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?

Provides clear context: 'Call this periodically or when you need to know about changes in dependent services.' This tells the agent when to use it, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it.

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