evidence_seed_sample

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

Without annotations, the description only mentions 'writes' and 'deterministic', but lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwrite behavior), required permissions, or error states. The behavior is minimally disclosed.

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 a single 8-word sentence, very concise. However, it omits crucial details, making it too terse for a tool with no schema descriptions. The structure front-loads 'Offline helper' but lacks necessary depth.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description fails to provide sufficient context about return values, interaction with evidence_get_bundle/evidence_wait_for_bundle, or the nature of the seed operation.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain the meaning or usage of any parameter (incident_id, service, window_minutes). The agent must rely solely on parameter names for understanding.

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 action 'writes' and the specific resource 'deterministic Evidence Bundle v1 JSON' to 'EVIDENCE_DIR'. It effectively differentiates from siblings like evidence_get_bundle (read) and evidence_wait_for_bundle (wait).

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 phrase 'Offline helper' implies a background or seeding use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like evidence_get_bundle. No when-not-to-use conditions are provided.

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