reverify

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It suggests a read or verification action but does not clarify side effects, required permissions, or consequences. The cryptic phrase adds no transparency.

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 short (two sentences), which meets conciseness. However, the second sentence is cryptic and wastes space, reducing clarity. It is front-loaded but not effective.

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 high parameter count (12), presence of nested objects, and 11 sibling tools, the description is far from complete. It fails to explain how parameters affect behavior, how this tool differs from siblings, or what output to expect.

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?

The input schema has 12 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description provides no explanations for any parameter, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use 'repo', 'rev_range', 'depth', etc.

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 states 'Render the agent worklist to recheck before claiming completion', which gives a verb and resource. However, the phrase 'sibling enrichment is advisory and never gates; absence is explicit, never clean' is cryptic and does not clarify the tool's primary function relative to siblings.

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 hints at sibling relationships with 'advisory and never gates' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No clear context or exclusions are provided.

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