Log Blocker

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It fails to mention whether the action is persistent, reversible, or has side effects. The tool mutates state but the description gives no such indication.

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 very short (3 words), which is concise but borders on under-specification. It lacks structure and front-loading of key information, though there is no wasted text.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and the presence of sibling tools, the description does not provide sufficient context about the tool's behavior, return value, or how it integrates with workflow.

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 100%, so the parameter 'content' is fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'what's blocked and why', which is already present in the schema's description.

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 uses the verb 'flag' to indicate recording an issue, but doesn't specify what kind of blockers or the exact resource, leaving some ambiguity. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_blockers' (listing) and 'resolve_blocker' (unblocking) only implicitly.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'log_attempt' or 'log_decision'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, which is insufficient for an agent to decide correctly.

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