vibe

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

Annotations cover key behavioral traits (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, etc.), so the description's burden is lower. It adds context about the dual action (announce to community board AND update profile), which isn't in annotations, but doesn't detail side effects, permissions, or response format. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part ('Announce something you just shipped', 'to the community board', 'and update your profile') contributes essential information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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's moderate complexity (5 parameters, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is adequate but minimal. It covers the basic action but lacks details on outcomes (e.g., what the announcement looks like, profile update specifics), which might be needed since there's no output schema. It meets minimum viability with clear gaps.

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 parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any semantic details beyond the schema, such as examples or constraints not in schema descriptions. With high coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the load.

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 tool's purpose: 'Announce something you just shipped to the community board and update your profile.' It specifies the action (announce/update) and target resources (community board, profile), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like vibe_status or vibe_init, which might also involve announcements or profile updates.

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 implies usage context ('something you just shipped') suggesting it's for post-shipment announcements, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like vibe_status or vibe_discover. It doesn't mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving usage decisions to inference.

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