observation_record

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals that the tool records lightweight evidence and is tied to phase gating, but does not disclose idempotency, side effects (e.g., whether it appends or overwrites), or what happens if called multiple times. Adequate but could be more detailed.

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, no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second gives usage instruction. Highly concise and well-structured.

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 record tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers core purpose, key parameters, and the phase gate context. It lacks return value details and behavior on repeated calls, but is mostly complete given the tool's straightforward nature.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 6 parameters, the description explicitly mentions 'loop' and 'phase' and implies 'runId' and 'summary' are needed. It does not explain 'kind' or 'sourceRef', leaving gaps. Adds meaning but incomplete.

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 the verb 'Record' and resource 'evidence' in the context of the current phase. It also adds outcome ('unlock the next section'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'artifact_record'.

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 explains it is for recording evidence to satisfy a phase gate and unlock the next section, providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the context is sufficient for appropriate selection.

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