Invalidate Journal

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotence (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). Description adds value by explaining the reversal effect and regulatory traceability requirement, without contradiction.

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 plus a concise advisory note. Front-loaded with the core action. No fluff; 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?

Covers purpose, outcome, and regulatory context. For a simple one-parameter mutation tool without output schema, it is nearly complete. Missing explicit prerequisites (confirmed status) but implied.

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?

Single parameter with 100% schema coverage and clear purpose. Description does not add new parameter-specific meaning beyond 'id', but the tool context makes it obvious which ID is needed.

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 action (invalidate/reverse), the resource (confirmed journal entry), and the result (returns to unconfirmed status). It distinguishes from siblings like confirm_journal by being the opposite operation.

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 context via RPS § 10 reference and advises user communication. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives (e.g., delete_journal for unconfirmed entries), but sufficient for most agents.

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