Yougile Overview

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict this. It adds that it shows session permissions, which is useful context, but does not detail output format or limitations. Since annotations cover safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the key content (what the overview covers) followed by a short usage directive. No redundant words or filler.

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?

The description enumerates all major aspects of the overview: hierarchy, workflow, defaults, and permissions. It does not specify the exact output format, but given there is no output schema and the tool is an overview, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand its purpose.

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 100% — both parameters have descriptions in the input schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline for well-documented parameters.

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 tool provides a company structure overview (projects → boards → columns), workflow chains, workspace defaults, and session permissions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like yougile_projects or yougile_boards by being a high-level starting point.

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 phrase 'Start here to learn the names' explicitly instructs the agent to use this tool first, implying it is a prerequisite for understanding naming before using other tools. It does not directly contrast with alternatives but gives a clear usage directive.

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