axint.fix-packet

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds 'read-only local artifact read; writes no files and uses no network,' reinforcing and expanding on the annotations with concrete behavioral details.

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?

Two sentences: first sentence states purpose and return value; second sentence gives usage rule and effects. Every sentence is essential and front-loaded. 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?

With output schema present, annotations, and 100% param coverage, the description covers core behavior. It could mention error handling (no packet found) or edge cases, but overall it is sufficiently complete given the rich structural context.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond 'latest packet' context, which the schema already implies via packetDir description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 reads the latest Fix Packet emitted locally after a compile or watch run, and specifies the return content (verdict, findings, diagnostics, next steps, AI-ready prompt). This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from all siblings.

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: use after a local compile/watch/check emitted a packet; not a new analysis pass.' This provides clear context and a when-not-to-use warning. It does not name specific sibling alternatives, but the usage rule is sufficient.

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