Stage approved publish job

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

Annotations provide only false hints, so the description carries the burden. It adds meaningful context: the operation revalidates, copies into an isolated workspace, and explicitly guarantees never plots. This goes beyond the annotation fields and gives a clearer behavioral profile.

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 sentence that front-loads the primary action, states the resource, and includes a critical constraint ('never plots'). Every word earns its place with no filler.

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 output schema exists and the tool is one step in a pipeline, the description covers the core behavior. It mentions isolation and the no-plot guarantee, which are important context. It lacks explicit prerequisites (e.g., plan must be approved) but those are partially implied by the name and schema.

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 descriptions cover both parameters 100% (path and approved_plan_id). The description adds a slight hint that 'approved plan' maps to approved_plan_id and the DWG relates to path, but it doesn't clarify whether path is the source or destination. Overall it adds marginal value beyond the schema.

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 uses specific verbs ('revalidate', 'copy') and names the key resources ('approved plan', 'DWG', 'isolated workspace'). The phrase 'never plots' clearly differentiates it from plotting/publishing siblings like queue_publish_job and preview_publish_plan.

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 the tool is used after plan approval and before plotting, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like stage_publish_batch or validate_staged_job. The only exclusion is 'never plots', but there is no direct comparison to sibling tools.

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