create_goal

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses side effects: creates a structured directory with specific files. It adds behavioral context beyond the schema. Minor lack of detail on permissions or reversibility.

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 sentences with front-loaded purpose and context about output structure and sibling tools. Every sentence is valuable and efficient.

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?

Fairly complete given complexity: mentions files created (.patchwarden/goals/{goal_id}/ with GOAL.md, GOALS.md, goal_status.json). No output schema, so return values not described, but overall adequate.

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%, so baseline 3. Description does not add significant meaning to parameters beyond what schema already provides.

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 'Create a Goal Session' with specific verb and resource, and mentions generating a structured directory, distinguishing it from siblings like list_goals and read_goal.

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 recommends using list_goals and read_goal for enumeration and inspection, providing clear context for when not to use this tool. Does not explicitly state exclusions but is sufficient.

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