Dismiss Statement

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation risk is known. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it clarifies that the operation is non-destructive to stored data/artifacts, marking the document as dismissed rather than deleting it. This is a meaningful behavioral disclosure that prevents an agent from overestimating the destructiveness.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the action and scope, the exact usage condition, and the critical non-delete clarification. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter tool with full schema coverage and annotations indicating destructiveness, the description is nearly complete. It explains the effect on list_statements results and clarifies data preservation. It could mention whether the dismissal is reversible, but that is a minor gap given the simplicity of the tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the single parameter document_id is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, but with full coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Hide'), the resource (failed/rejected/cancelled documents), and the effect (excluded from future list_statements results). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from a delete operation, which differentiates it from sibling tools like convert_statement or get_statement.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this only when the user asks to clear a terminal failed/rejected/cancelled conversion from their history.' It also states what it is not ('This is not a delete'), which helps an agent avoid misusing it as a deletion tool.

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