Replay Regression Checks

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

Annotation contradiction: description claims 'Read-only (clean GETs)' while annotations set destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. This inconsistency undermines trust. Despite rich behavioral detail, the contradiction is critical.

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?

Detailed but well-organized with clear sections. Slightly lengthy for a no-param tool, but each sentence adds value.

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?

Fully explains behavior (independent re-checks, classification outcomes, read-only nature) despite no parameters. Output schema exists to cover return values.

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?

No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by explaining the nullary operation's scope and classification logic.

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?

Clearly states the tool re-tests previously-recorded findings against the current build to verify fixes and detect regressions. Distinct from siblings like 'record_bug' or 'observe' by focusing on replay and classification.

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?

Describes when to use (post-deployment regression check) and implicitly when not to (not for new captures). Lacks explicit alternatives but context from siblings provides enough guidance.

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