Plan TD Brain Task

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

Annotations already provide non-mutating and non-destructive hints. The description adds behavioral context: returns a concept graph and typed patch plan, and instructs to execute only when coverage is complete, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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 that are front-loaded with purpose and usage, then exclusion cases. Every sentence provides value; no fluff.

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?

Given the tool complexity (12 parameters, many siblings, output schema exists), the description adequately covers when to use, return value, execution condition, and exclusions. No critical gaps.

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% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific info, which is acceptable given the schema covers all 12 parameters fully.

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 returns a non-mutating concept graph, typed patch plan, and server-derived intent coverage for pattern-shaped requests with validated topology/technique, differentiating from siblings by specifying when to use alternatives.

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 this tool (pattern-shaped requests) and when not (artistic, multi-domain, etc.), directly recommending alternative tool sequence (td_brain_ground → td_brain_propose).

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