athena_rehydration_verify

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the fresh-sync, replay, and verification steps, and importantly explains the meaning of PASS as shared-current causal-integrity evidence, not world truth. However, it omits side effects of the fresh-sync and failure behavior.

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 the core action, and each sentence adds value. The caveat about PASS is a meaningful addition, not 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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the main action and interpretation of results. It lacks details on return format and when to use, but is reasonably complete for its complexity.

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 0%, so the description must explain loop_id. It references 'current persisted loop chain' but does not explicitly state that loop_id identifies that chain. The parameter semantics remain ambiguous, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name.

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 uses specific verbs and resources: 'Fresh-sync the shared Git branch, then replay and verify...' It clearly distinguishes this verify operation from sibling rehydration tools like start/advance/resume. It also clarifies what PASS means, adding purpose precision.

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 implies a rehydration verification workflow but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as rehydration_advance or rehydration_resume. No exclusions or alternative references are given.

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