context_resolve

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only says 'mark resolved' and 'stops surfacing', but does not disclose side effects (e.g., irreversibility, permission requirements, or state changes beyond surfacing).

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 a single short sentence that is front-loaded and efficient. However, given the lack of parameter guidance, it could be slightly expanded without losing 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 tool with one required parameter, no annotations, and an output schema (unknown content), the description lacks critical details: what the output looks like, whether the action is reversible, and how to interpret 'resolve'. This makes it incomplete for confident use.

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 0% and the description does not mention the parameter 'entry_id' at all. The agent has no guidance on what value to provide, its format, or how to obtain it. This severely undermines correct 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 clearly states the verb ('mark resolved'), the resource ('open question or task'), and the effect ('stops surfacing in context_pull'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like context_search or context_log, which have different purposes.

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 when to use (when a question/task is resolved), but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives like context_verify. No prerequisites are stated.

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