ddflow_brief

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly describes the returned content and notes token efficiency, but it does not explicitly state whether the tool is read-only or whether it has any side effects such as claiming work or updating state.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the most important usage instruction ('START HERE every session'), lists the output contents compactly, and closes with a concrete advantage (token savings).

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 read-style informational tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description explains what the result contains, when to use it, and why it is preferable to reading raw project files. It is slightly jargon-heavy ('budgeted pack'), but the following list disambiguates it well.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but it does not need to because the schema covers item, phase, and check_recovery.

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 states a specific action ('Returns a budgeted pack') and enumerates exactly what the pack contains: recoverable work, current item, ready-to-start work, blocked items, and relevant lessons. It clearly establishes the tool's role as the session entry point, which distinguishes it from the many sibling ddflow 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?

The instruction 'START HERE every session' gives explicit when-to-use guidance, and 'Use this INSTEAD of reading the project's lesson or rule files' names the alternative it replaces. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like ddflow_status or ddflow_session_start, which is a minor gap.

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