skypilot_optimize

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it analyzes clouds/regions/instance types and returns an optimized DAG, which is useful context beyond the annotation. However, it doesn't disclose potential costs, time taken, or whether it requires cloud credentials beyond what the schema implies.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by method and parameters. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured with bullets for the minimize options.

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 that an output schema exists, the description needn't explain return values, but it does mention returning the optimized DAG. For a tool with two parameters, one undocumented (task_yaml), and no annotation beyond readOnly, the description is fairly complete but misses explaining the required task_yaml input.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the 'minimize' parameter with allowed values ('COST' default or 'TIME'), providing crucial meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it does not explain 'task_yaml' at all, leaving one of two parameters undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb (find/optimize) and resource (execution plan for a task), and clarifies that it analyzes clouds, regions, and instance types for optimal placement. It is clear what the tool does, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like skypilot_validate or skypilot_check.

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 usage (to find the best execution plan) but offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to alternatives. Sibling tools like skypilot_validate exist, but the description doesn't explain when to optimize versus validate. Usage context is only implied.

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