sswp_verify

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

Explains that it recomputes hash over sorted keys excluding signature field and compares against stored signature. Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent; description adds algorithmic detail and return values.

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?

Concise yet comprehensive. Each sentence adds value: purpose, mechanism, outputs, usage guidance, alternatives. Front-loaded with core action.

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?

Covers all needed context: single parameter, return values (two outcomes), algorithm, usage scenarios, differentiation from siblings. No missing information for agent to invoke correctly.

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 covers filePath with clear details (absolute path, valid attestation requirement). Tool description reinforces this. Despite 100% schema coverage, description adds minor context about the signature field.

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?

Clearly states it verifies SHA-256 cryptographic signature of .sswp.json attestation file, specifying verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings by naming alternatives (sswp_witness for generating, sswp_check_repo for repo checks).

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'audit an attestation you received' or 'confirm a repo's attestation'. Provides clear alternatives for different tasks.

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