verify_behavior

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

No annotations provided. Description explains the tool returns a scenario and requires an answer, but does not explicitly state if it's read-only or has other side effects. Still adds significant behavioral context beyond schema.

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?

Description is very concise (2 sentences + example) with no extraneous information. Critical usage instruction and example are front-loaded.

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 verification tool, description fully explains the workflow: call before editing, receive a scenario, answer concretely. No output schema needed as return type is described.

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?

Input schema covers all 4 parameters with descriptions. Description adds no new parameter-specific details beyond the schema, but the overall context helps clarify usage. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool should be called before editing behavioral source files and provides a specific example, distinguishing it from sibling 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?

Explicitly states when to use ('BEFORE editing behavioral source files') and what to do after ('Answer the scenario concretely'), with a clear alternative: not editing behavioral files.

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