archy_record_baseline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that it both computes a score and records it to history.jsonl. It also notes it is a convenience wrapper, which is helpful. Missing details on error behavior or side effects, but acceptable for a simple 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action, no redundant information. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 there is an output schema, return values are covered elsewhere. But the description lacks explanation for the two parameters (path and internal_only) and does not mention error scenarios. The usage context is clear, but incomplete for full agent understanding.

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% (no descriptions in schema), but the description does not explain what 'path' or 'internal_only' mean. It adds no additional meaning beyond the parameter names and types, leaving the agent uninformed about these inputs.

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 states 'Compute the score for a Python project AND append it to .archy/history.jsonl', which is a specific verb+resource. It also clarifies it is a convenience wrapper for archy_score(record=True), distinguishing it from sibling archy_score.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use at the start of an agent session so a later archy_score(strict=True) can detect degradation', giving clear when-to-use context. It does not list when not to use, but the guidance is strong.

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