jambavan_debt_ledger

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

With no annotations, the description discloses read-only behavior and explains the process (scan, group, flag). It does not cover auth needs or rate limits, but the tool is simple and read-only, so the transparency is good.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. No wasted 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, grouping, flagging, read-only nature, and use case.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add parameter details, but none are needed. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 harvests 'rin markers' from the project into a debt ledger, groups by file, and flags untriggered markers. The verb 'harvest' and resource 'rin marker' are specific, distinguishing it from siblings like read_file or jambavan_index.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call before a release or refactor sprint,' providing clear context. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the sibling tools suggest this is specialized, so the guidance is adequate.

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