harness_classify

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that simple tasks skip PGO and review, but does not detail other behavioral traits (e.g., idempotency, state changes). Adequate for a simple classification but not fully transparent.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb, examples, and usage guidance. Every sentence is purposeful with no extraneous content.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, and behavioral implications. However, it does not describe the output/return value (e.g., expected format like 'simple' or 'complex'), which is missing since no output schema exists. This leaves an important gap for an AI agent invoking 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?

The schema documents one parameter 'message' with description 'User's task description'. The tool description adds meaning by defining the classification outcomes and context, significantly enriching the parameter semantics beyond the schema alone.

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 function: 'Classify a task as simple or complex' with explicit examples. It distinguishes from sibling tools (harness_init, etc.) by focusing on classification rather than execution or review.

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 specifies 'Call before starting work' and explains that simple tasks skip overhead, providing clear contextual guidance. However, it does not explicitly discuss when not to use or give direct comparisons to siblings.

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