linka-teach-start

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions 'confirmation and dry-run support', hinting at safe experimental usage. However, it does not detail what happens during recording, side effects, authentication needs, or the outcome of confirmation. It is minimally 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, but it could be slightly more structured. No redundancy, but it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain the recording lifecycle, return values, or error handling. An agent lacks critical context to invoke the tool reliably.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only vaguely references 'confirmation and dry-run support', which maps to two of five parameters. It does not explain confirmationToken, confirmationPhrase, reason, or how dryRun works. The agent has insufficient information to fill parameters correctly.

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 action 'Start Teach recording', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It adds 'with confirmation and dry-run support', giving a bit more context. However, it does not explain what 'Teach recording' means, and the tool name alone implies 'start', so the description adds minimal differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like linka-teach-stop or linka-teach-status. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The description fails to help an agent decide when to invoke this tool over its siblings.

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