list_pending_proposals

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

Discloses read-only behavior: 'local project-memory files remain authoritative'. States that proposal application must happen elsewhere. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden and does so thoroughly.

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 efficient sentences: first states purpose and scope, second adds restrictions. Front-loaded, no redundancy, 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?

Given low complexity (1 param, no output schema), description fully covers purpose, read-only nature, and application process. No gaps for agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 'status' with enum and default. Schema coverage 100%. Description adds value by clarifying default maps to 'open pending proposals', enhancing schema meaning.

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 'Read hosted proposal summaries for Hybrid mode', specifying a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing read-only nature and the requirement to apply proposals via the VibeCompass package sync flow.

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?

Explicitly says use for reading, not for applying proposals. Provides alternative for proposal application ('VibeCompass package sync flow'). Guides when not to use this tool and where else to go.

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