Invalidate Journal

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

Annotations already show readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and idempotentHint=true. Description adds context: reverses to unconfirmed status for editing/deletion, which clarifies the non-destructive nature (destructiveHint=false). Does not contradict annotations.

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, no extraneous information. Front-loaded with verb and purpose. Every word 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?

Adequate for a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema. Covers purpose and resulting state. Could mention that it applies only to confirmed journals, but siblings list is available for disambiguation.

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% for the single parameter 'id'. Description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's description. Baseline score appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states verb (Invalidate/reverse) and resource (confirmed journal entry). Distinguishes from siblings like confirm_journal and delete_journal by specifying the action and resulting state.

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?

Implies usage for reversing confirmed entries before editing or deletion, but lacks explicit context on when to use this over alternatives like delete_journal or invalidate_transaction. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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