slipbox_dismiss_cluster

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait: the action is 'Permanently' dismiss, implying irreversibility. It also specifies the effect on maintenance suggestions. It does not detail other side effects, but for a simple dismiss action this is sufficient and adds meaningful context beyond the name/schema.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the action, the second gives usage context, and the final part documents the parameter. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary detail.

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 tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), and the description covers purpose, usage, and parameter meaning. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without ambiguity.

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?

The schema provides only 'cluster_id' with a type and title, with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by explaining what the parameter is: 'The cluster ID to dismiss' and provides a concrete example ('poetry-craft-revision'). This gives the agent a clear understanding of the expected format and semantics.

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 opens with a clear, specific verb+resource: 'Permanently dismiss a cluster from maintenance suggestions.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like refresh_clusters or create_structure_from_cluster. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 states when to use: 'when a cluster has been reviewed and determined not to need a structure note, or when the user doesn't want to be reminded about it.' This gives concrete scenarios and implicitly tells when not to use it (when a structure note IS needed), differentiating it from alternatives.

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