Create private seed packet

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, so write behavior is known. The description adds the concrete write target (.notch/private/outbox/), the purpose/sensitivity values written, and the fact that the packet stays local and unimported until import_seed_packet runs. This goes beyond annotations by explaining the lifecycle and destination.

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 usage condition, then precise destination and lifecycle. No filler.

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?

For a 10-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the key outcome (write to specific path), usage condition, and lifecycle. It doesn't mention return behavior or the ignored-parameter nuance, but the schema covers parameters. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage, including notes that several fields are accepted but not recorded. The description itself adds no parameter detail beyond referencing title and summary. Baseline 3 applies because the schema fully documents parameters.

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 creates a private seed packet for durable private context, writes it to .notch/private/outbox/, and distinguishes it from handing context to someone else. Specific verb (writes), resource (seed packet), and scope (private, local) are all present.

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?

Provides an explicit usage condition: 'Use when the user wants durable private context... for a future session rather than handed to someone else.' This gives clear when and when-not, though it doesn't name a specific alternative tool. It also mentions import_seed_packet as the complementary import step.

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