Steer Active Codex Agent

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

It discloses an additive operation ('append') scoped to the worker's in-flight turn, which is useful beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe failure behavior when no active turn exists or whether guidance is applied synchronously.

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 entire description is one front-loaded, waste-free sentence that states the action and scope immediately. The turn/steer mechanism detail is extra but not padded.

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?

Although the tool is simple (two required string parameters), the description omits prerequisites such as requiring an existing active turn, error conditions, and expected return behavior, and there is no output schema to fill that 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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the description never explicitly maps `prompt` to 'guidance' or `agentId` to the worker. The mention of 'its expected active turn id' is confusing because no turn id parameter exists in the schema, leaving parameter relationships under-specified.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Append guidance to the worker's current in-flight turn.' This clearly differentiates from starting, resuming, or interrupting an agent, though it never names sibling tools explicitly.

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 'current in-flight turn' implies the tool is for an existing active turn and for adding guidance mid-turn, but the description does not state when to prefer this over agent_send or agent_interrupt, nor does it give exclusions.

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