check

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

No annotations provided; the description does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or requires permissions. It only states the action of checking, leaving behavioral traits ambiguous.

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?

Extremely concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by a brief Args section. Front-loaded with key action and context, no wasted words.

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 2-param tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and usage context. However, it lacks behavioral details (e.g., read-only nature) that would improve completeness given no annotations.

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%; the description adds minimal meaning: 'Describe what you're about to do' for planned_action (tautological) and 'Filter by namespace' for namespace. This slightly improves over the schema but remains vague.

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 it's a pre-flight check to see if corrections apply before taking action. It uses a specific verb ('check') and resource ('corrections'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like store or recall.

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 'Call this before doing something', providing clear when-to-use context. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the sibling names imply distinct uses.

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