clarify

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It explains the input provenance and that this is an answer to a clarification, which is useful context. However, it doesn't describe side effects, return values, or any state changes after answering.

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 purpose and followed by necessary context. Every word earns its place; 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and fully described parameters, the description is fairly complete. It lacks an explanation of what happens after answering (e.g., return value), but it's not critical for this action. The context from siblings and the schema fills most gaps.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying that session_id and clarification_id come from the previous response, which helps the agent locate the correct values beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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: to provide an answer to a clarification raised by codegen. It identifies the specific resource (clarification) and action (answer), and references codegen, distinguishing it from siblings like codegen itself.

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?

It explicitly says the session_id and clarification_id come from the previous codegen (or clarify) response, telling the agent when to use this tool. It implies the flow (after a clarification request), though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it.

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