brief_feedback

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Submit feedback' with no info about idempotency, overwriting previous feedback, required user context, or error conditions. It adds minimal context beyond the tool's purpose.

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?

Single sentence with prioritized action and list of values. No wasted words.

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?

Simple 2-parameter tool, but no output schema or annotations. Description covers purpose and allowed actions but omits behavioral outcomes, response, or whether feedback replaces existing. Adequate for basic invocation but leaves gaps.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description repeats the enum values, adding slight clarity but no new semantics beyond schema. The schema descriptions are minimal, but the description doesn't explain format or dependencies.

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 uses specific verb 'Submit feedback' and identifies the resource 'a brief', enumerating all four accepted actions. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_briefs or get_brief, which are read operations, by indicating a write/feedback action.

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 vs alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., brief must exist) or exclude scenarios. The enum values imply feedback context but don't provide explicit usage direction.

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