Distillation gate

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

Annotations alone only say readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries the side-effect disclosure burden. It explicitly states the tool appends a gate record to the audit journal and never mutates state.lock, going beyond the annotations and giving an agent a clear behavioral model.

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 with the main purpose and report scope front-loaded, followed by the key side-effect and sibling differentiation. No filler, and both sentences earn their place.

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 tool with no output schema and only two optional parameters, the description is complete: it names what the report includes, the thresholds, the side effect, and the distinction from distill and archive. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions thresholds theta and n with defaults, which adds context but largely repeats what the schema already documents; it does not provide substantial new parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Report whether the project passes the distillation gate', and enumerates the report contents (baseline, treewidth delta, work items done, what would distill). It also distinguishes itself from related tools by noting 'distill is the worksheet and archive is the action'.

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 clearly frames gate as a reporting/evaluation tool and distinguishes it from distill and archive, which are the worksheet and action respectively. It communicates that gate does not mutate state.lock, but it does not explicitly spell out all conditions for when to choose gate over other siblings like check or status.

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