Publish a curated handoff

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-idempotent behavior. The description adds the behavioral nuance that output should be curated rather than the full conversation, but does not mention side effects, persistence, or permission requirements. This is some added context, not a contradiction.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and key guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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?

Given the complexity (13 parameters, no output schema, and annotations that do not add much), the description is insufficient. It conveys the core use-case but omits details about required fields, the publishing outcome, or how 'curated' should be interpreted. This is comparable to the 'update_drive' example in the mid tier.

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 0%, and the description provides no information about parameters. With 13 parameters and 4 required, the description should compensate but does not mention title, summary, content, project, or any other fields. This is a severe gap.

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 publishes a curated handoff to another agent, using the specific verb 'publish' and resource 'handoff'. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'curated conclusions, not an entire conversation', though it does not explicitly name alternative tools.

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 first sentence provides an explicit trigger: 'Use when the user explicitly asks to pass the current discussion/result to another agent.' It also gives a content guideline ('curated conclusions, not an entire conversation by default'), but does not mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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