sync_desktop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It covers the incremental nature, speed on repeat calls, first-call equivalence to import, and a prerequisite (sqlcipher). However, it does not specify side effects (e.g., whether local data is modified) or discuss safety/read-only aspects.

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, each conveying essential information: incremental sync, performance on repeat calls, first-call behavior, and a prerequisite. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the main action.

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?

The description covers purpose, behavior, and prerequisites adequately for a simple tool with no parameters and no output schema. It lacks details about what the tool returns after a sync, but given the low complexity, it is nearly complete.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed since there are no parameters.

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 performs an incremental sync from Signal Desktop, importing only newer messages. It distinguishes from the sibling import_desktop by noting that on first call it behaves like it, making the purpose specific.

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?

The description implies usage for repeated syncs by highlighting speed on repeat calls and contrasting with first call behavior (like import_desktop). However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or name alternatives for other scenarios.

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