heddle_change_list

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It mentions 'Local-only; may initialize .weft/heddle state' which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like file writes or modifications, nor does it clarify what 'initialize' entails. More detail would be needed for a higher score.

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: first states the main action clearly, second adds important caveats (local-only, may initialize state). No unnecessary words, front-loaded, and efficiently conveys scope and constraints.

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?

Despite high complexity (10 params, nested objects, output schema), the description is minimal. It does not explain the parameters, output structure, pagination (cursor, limit), or sorting. The output schema exists but is not referenced. The description is insufficient for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the 10 parameters. It says nothing about 'repo', 'rev_range', 'filters', etc. This fails to add meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent guessing.

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 it lists changed entities and provides next actions like reverify/impact. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'changed' by mentioning reverify/impact next actions. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other similar tools like 'heddle_reverify_worklist_get' or 'heddle_entity_churn_count_get', so it is not a 5.

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 usage when you need to list changed entities and get next actions, but it does not specify when not to use it or provide alternatives among sibling tools. The context signal shows many heddle-related siblings, yet no guidance is given on choosing this over them.

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