cloud_sync_push

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses a key behavior: incremental sync (only newer entries). However, it does not mention potential side effects like overwriting cloud data, failure modes, authentication requirements, or whether the operation is idempotent. This is partial transparency, enough for an average score.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and destination, followed by the key behavioral constraint. No redundant or filler words; 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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the primary action and main behavioral nuance. It lacks return value details but that is not critical for a push operation. The sibling tools provide additional context, making this sufficiently complete.

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 'force' 100% with a clear description. The tool description adds context by indicating the default behavior (only newer) which relates to force, but it does not explain the parameter itself beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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's action: 'Push local knowledge entries and session summaries to the cloud server.' The verb 'Push' is specific, and the resource/destination are explicit. The added clause about only pushing entries newer than the last sync distinguishes it from sibling tools like cloud_sync_pull and cloud_sync_status.

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 description implies usage (push vs pull) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions. The 'only newer' behavior hints at the force parameter but gives no direct guidance on when to use force or how this tool compares to cloud_sync_pull.

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