dossier_certify

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

The description clearly states that the dossier transitions to CERTIFIED, locks in evidence groups, and generates a tamper-evident PDF. Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, which the description aligns with via irreversible changes.

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?

Four concise sentences with clear structure: main action, conditions, alternative, and example. No redundant information.

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's complexity (status change, locking, PDF generation) and no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, state constraints, and alternative, making it fully actionable for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are well-described. The description adds a usage example and reiterates the status requirement, providing additional context beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'certifies' and identifies the resource as 'DRAFT dossier'. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'dossier_group_certify' by explicitly stating the alternative use case.

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?

It specifies prerequisites (dossier must exist, have evidence groups), required state (DRAFT), and provides an explicit alternative when to use 'dossier_group_certify' instead.

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