skylight_resolve_member

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a specific object structure on success/failure, and that on mismatch it lists all members. No side effects or auth requirements are mentioned, but for a read-only resolve operation this is acceptable.

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 purpose, then return format. No redundant information. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description includes the return object fields. It covers the essential behavior for a resolve tool. However, it does not explain the 'members' array structure or the 'note' field, and the 'frameId' parameter is unexplained.

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 describes only 'name' (50% coverage). The description adds context for 'name' by explaining its purpose and the return behavior, but 'frameId' is left undocumented. The description partially compensates but leaves a 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 resolves a family-member name to a category ID, used by chores/rewards. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_frame_members by focusing on resolution to an ID. The verb 'resolve' and resource 'member name' are specific.

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 explains the behavior on match and mismatch, including return values. However, it does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, though it is implied as a lookup tool. No when-not guidance is provided.

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