Approve TNL diff

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

Annotations indicate destructive and idempotent; description explicitly lists file writes, sidecar regeneration, and staging removal—adding concrete behavioral specifics beyond 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?

Single 15-word sentence, no redundancy, every word carries meaning.

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 single param, no output schema, and rich annotations, description sufficiently covers actions and prerequisite. Minor omission: no mention of return value or error cases.

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 covers diff_id with description, but description adds valuable origin context ('returned by propose_tnl_diff'), helping agent understand where the parameter comes from.

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 uses specific verb 'Apply' and resource 'staged proposal', enumerating exact actions (write, regenerate sidecar, remove staging record). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tool propose_tnl_diff which creates the proposal.

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 prerequisite of having a staged proposal from propose_tnl_diff, but does not explicitly state when not to use or alternatives. Sibling context helps but could be more direct.

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