kaiten_chart_block_resolution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys a read-style operation and says what data is returned, but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, describe output format, or mention pagination or aggregation behavior. The description adds some behavioral context but not full transparency.

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 short sentences with no filler. The primary action and the output are stated immediately, making it easy for an agent to process quickly.

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 simple two-parameter tool with schema-complete parameters, the description gives enough high-level information to attempt invocation. However, without an output schema or annotations, it omits useful context such as output shape details, whether the data is paginated, and how this chart relates to other chart endpoints in the sibling list.

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%, and both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add further semantic detail about space_id or category_ids, matching the baseline of 3 for schemas that already cover parameter meaning.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Get blocker resolution time data for a space' and specifies the output ('resolved blockers with their resolution durations'). This distinguishes it from card blocker CRUD tools and other chart metrics well.

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 clear context that this tool operates 'for a space' and returns blocker resolution durations, so an agent can infer when it is relevant. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over other similar chart tools, nor does it mention any alternatives or exclusions.

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