case_promote

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals side effects: writes MD/SKILL.md, writes to KB, and marks the case. This goes beyond a simple 'promote' and gives useful behavioral context, though it doesn't mention overwrite behavior or permissions.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by specific actions. Every sentence is essential with no fluff or repetition.

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?

The description covers the core behavior thoroughly for a simple tool. It explains what it generates, where it writes, and that it marks the case. It doesn't detail return values or error cases, but given the output schema exists (not shown) and the tool's moderate complexity, this is reasonably complete.

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 0%, but the description explains 'target = fiche or skill', clarifying the valid values for the target parameter. case_id is not explicitly described but is self-explanatory. This adds some meaning beyond schema, but lacks detail on the 'marks the case' effect or any parameter constraints.

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 tool's purpose: 'Promote a resolved case into validated KB' with specific actions 'Generates the MD/SKILL.md from the case, writes it to the KB and marks the case.' It distinguishes from siblings like case_set_status or fiche_write by describing the promotion workflow.

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 when a case is 'resolved' and you want to validate it into the KB, with 'target = fiche or skill' indicating the KB entry type. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like fiche_write, but the context is clear enough for most agents.

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