context_log

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

Describes return value (new entry id) and optional refs format. No annotations provided, but the description covers basic behavior. Lacks details on failure modes or side effects.

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?

Concise two-paragraph structure. No redundant sentences. Front-loaded with purpose and type details.

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 no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description covers essential behavior, return value, and usage guidelines. Missing explanation for 'segment' parameter is a gap.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning for type (enum values) and refs (optional JSON with example). However, 'segment' is not explained, and 'content' is only implied.

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 'Append an entry to the shared working state', using a specific verb and resource. It lists allowed types and distinguishes from sibling tools like context_search and context_verify.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use (store WHAT/WHY, not HOW) and specific rules for the 'change' type (only mark done when merged). Does not explicitly exclude cases, but context from siblings helps.

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