Record agent action

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

Discloses side effects ('writes an activity row') and failure modes ('fails when the workspace id is invalid'), which is useful since no annotations are provided. Could expand on other side effects like permissions or rate limits.

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 uses labeled sections (Purpose, When to use, Inputs, Side effects, Output, Failure modes) which is highly structured and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value with no redundant text.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, inputs, side effects, output, and failure modes. For a logging tool with good schema coverage, this is nearly complete. Could mention what the returned action_id format is or any constraints on the action_type.

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 100%, so the description adds minimal value beyond listing inputs. It notes that some parameters are optional, but this is already implied by the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Purpose: Log what an agent is doing in a workspace.' It uses a specific verb ('log') and resource ('agent action'), and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'record_changeset' which log different entities.

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?

Provides explicit timing guidance: 'call at the start or end of meaningful work so other agents can see active intent and progress.' Though alternatives aren't mentioned, the purpose is distinct enough that this suffices.

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