warpline_change_list

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 mentions 'may initialize .weft/warpline state' which is a key side effect, and 'local-only' scoping. However, it doesn't specify if the operation is read-only or if it requires specific permissions, leaving a significant gap for a tool with potential initialization.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the primary action. The structure is efficient though it could benefit from a clearer separation of main purpose and side note.

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 complexity (10 params, output schema, many siblings), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain key behaviors like pagination, filtering, or how the 'next actions' are determined. The agent lacks guidance to use this tool effectively.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 10 parameters, the description must compensate by explaining key parameters. It fails to mention any parameter details (e.g., repo format, rev_range, filters, sort options), providing no additional meaning beyond the schema structure.

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 lists changed entities and provides next actions (reverify/impact), distinguishing it from simpler list tools like 'changed' or 'warpline_reverify_worklist_get'. The verb 'list' and resource 'changed entities' are specific, though the term 'next actions' could be clearer.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. 'Local-only' hints at context but doesn't compare to siblings like 'changed' or 'warpline_reverify_worklist_get'. The agent is left to infer usage.

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