fast_integrate

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

The description adds some behavioral context beyond annotations, notably that the operation is asynchronous and performs registration and integration in a single pass. However, it does not describe side effects, output behavior, or what happens to input files, which would be useful given readOnlyHint=false.

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 is three short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose of the tool, then explains scope and usage context, and ends with the async qualifier. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

While the purpose and usage context are clear, the description is incomplete for a tool with four parameterscars and zero schema descriptions. No output schema exists, and the agent is left without parameter semantics, prerequisites, or expected outcomes, making correct invocation uncertain.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of any of the four parameters: files, out, keep_open, or reference. This leaves the agent without meaningful guidance for constructing a valid invocation.

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 names a specific verb ('Quick-look stack'), a specific method (FastIntegration), and explicitly states what is included (registration + integration in one pass) and excluded (no drizzle, no LN). This clearly distinguishes it from related siblings like integrate, drizzle_integrate, and register.

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?

It gives explicit context for when to use the tool: 'Good for a 2-minute sanity check of a night's data.' It does not name alternatives or explicitly state when not to use it, but the quick-look framing implies it is not for full-quality final integration.

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