contribute_feedback

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully carries the burden. It discloses local saving, opt-in anonymous sending, and session limit—covering the key behaviors for a feedback submission tool.

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?

Three sentences with no redundancy. Purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds distinct information (purpose, storage, limit). Excellent conciseness.

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?

For a simple feedback submisssion tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, storage, anonymization, and rate limit. No missing aspects apparent.

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%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics (e.g., no hints about how to fill fields). Baseline 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?

Description starts with 'Submit feedback about gitmem' and enumerates types (feature requests, bug reports, etc.). Clearly identifies the verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings as the dedicated feedback tool.

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 context on storage ('saved locally to .gitmem/feedback/'), opt-in anonymization, and a rate limit ('10/session limit'). Does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, but no similar siblings exist, so the guidance is adequate.

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