complete_critique_request

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses license scoping and default pin_count, but lacks details on error conditions (e.g., invalid id, already completed) or side effects. Adequate for a simple update but could be more thorough.

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 with no fluff. Purpose, prerequisite, and a key constraint are front-loaded. 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, and scoping. Missing details on idempotency or status preconditions, but overall complete enough within the broader toolset context.

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 100% with clear descriptions. The description adds minimal extra value by tying id to get_pending_critiques and explaining pin_count's purpose. Per guidelines, baseline 3 applies.

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 tool marks a critique_queue request as completed after the critic subagent runs, using the request ID from get_pending_critiques. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_pending_critiques and create_critique_pin by focusing on completion.

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 ('after the critic subagent has run') and provides a critical scoping constraint (cannot complete another tenant's request). Does not list alternative tools for other actions, but the context is clear.

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