Tick a release checklist step

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

Beyond the annotations (which only say non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), it discloses that approval-type steps are rejected, that a confirm gate is required, and the permission model ('Team, Developer role'). The idempotency claim in the annotations is consistent with the tick/untick framing.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and untick variant, then constraints. The 'Only tick what the person says was really done' and 'Ask the person first and pass confirm: true' sentences overlap slightly, costing a little economy.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and half its parameters undocumented in the schema, the description supplies the gating rules, the blocked-step-type behavior, and the required role. What happens on failure (error shape, whether unticking is audited) is the only notable gap.

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 50%, and the description compensates: it explains 'done: false' as the untick direction and 'confirm: true' as the ask-the-person gate, both adding intent beyond the schema's const/default fields. 'key' and 'build' are only restated from the schema, so it stops short of full coverage.

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 (tick/untick) and resource (one step of the release checklist on a build), plus the source of the key (release_checklist). The 'done: false' untick variant disambiguates the negative case without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('only tick what the person says was really done'), an explicit exclusion (approval steps with an approver cannot be ticked here), and names the correct alternative (the dashboard, where the approver answers). It also mandates asking the person first, which is operational guidance an agent could not infer.

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