axint.agent.release

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

Annotations include idempotentHint=true and no destructive or read-only hints. The description adds value by explaining it updates local coordination files under .axint/coordination with no network calls, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 three sentences: purpose, benefit, and usage/effects. It is front-loaded, efficient, and contains no redundant information.

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 tool's complexity (multi-agent coordination), the description covers the action, when to use, and effects. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. All parameters are described in the 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond the schema; it provides high-level context but no extra details.

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 explicitly states the tool releases active local Axint file claims after finishing or abandoning a task, using specific verbs and resources. It clearly distinguishes from sibling 'axint.agent.claim' by mentioning unblocking other agents.

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 explicitly says 'use after finishing or abandoning claimed files so other agents are unblocked,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context of alternatives is implied by the sibling claim tool.

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