navvi_milestone

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains that add creates a milestone (optionally capturing a screenshot), list retrieves, export generates markdown, brief generates a persona profile, and delete removes a milestone. It mentions retroactive imports using screenshot_file and ts, which are behavioral traits beyond basic CRUD.

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 well-organized with a clear header, bullet-like examples for each action, and additional notes on tags and details. While it is long, it avoids verbosity and every line adds value. A slightly more compact format could improve it.

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 has 13 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and no annotations, this description covers all necessary aspects: all actions, parameter usage, and behavioral details. An output schema exists, so return values are not required. The description is fully adequate for correct invocation.

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 compensate. It thoroughly explains all 13 parameters through examples and notes: tags as comma-separated, screenshot=true captures screen, detail must include full content, etc. Each parameter's role is made clear.

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 starts with 'Curated lifetime timeline for a persona — milestones with evidence' and lists actions (add, list, export, delete). This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like navvi_context or navvi_browse which handle browser automation.

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 provides concrete usage examples for each action (add, list, export, brief, delete), including parameter values. It tells when to use 'brief' ('Read this before acting as a persona'). However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives.

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