lc_preview_merge_cases

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond 'Preview merging'. It doesn't state whether the tool is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has any side effects. The description is insufficient for understanding safety and behavior.

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 a single concise sentence, but it lacks structure such as front-loaded key information or enumerated details. While brief, it does not fully earn its place as it omits critical 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 complexity of merging multiple source cases into a target, the description is very incomplete. No output schema is provided, and the expected return value (preview details) is not described. The agent would have to guess tool behavior.

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 adds no information about the parameters (oid, token_ttl_seconds, target_case_number, source_case_numbers). The agent has no guidance on how to use these parameters correctly.

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 action ('Preview merging') and the objects ('source cases into a target case'). It is specific and distinguishes this tool from siblings like lc_preview_update_case or lc_preview_bulk_update_cases, though it could elaborate on what 'preview' means in this context.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., lc_confirm_action for actual merge). There is no context about prerequisites or scenarios where preview is appropriate.

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