ck_review_feedback

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

Discloses write operation and gate blocking/unblocking. Adds context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) by explaining execution gate impact and human-facing nature. Could detail gate mechanism more, but sufficient.

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?

Concise two-sentence structure with front-loaded purpose, followed by parameter explanations and workflow context. No unnecessary words.

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?

Complete for a 5-parameter tool with output schema: explains role in two-step process, parameter usage, consequences, and sibling relationship. No 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?

With 80% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds value by linking review_id to ck_review_submit, clarifying decision values, and explaining feedback_notes and annotations purposes.

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 verb ('Approve or deny') and resource ('submitted review'), and differentiates from sibling 'ck_review_submit' by explaining the workflow relationship.

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?

Explicit when-to-use: after submission, by human or authorized agent. Explains consequences: approval unblocks execution, denial requires plan revision. Distinguishes from submission tool.

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