veto_continue

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint and destructiveHint; the description adds valuable behavioral context: restored session includes full context, summary, next action, and that nothing needs re-explanation. This informs the agent about the tool's output without an output 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?

Two sentences, zero wasted words. Front-loaded with action and resource, then immediate usage guidance. Perfectly compact.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 required params, 2 well-described parameters, no nested objects, no output schema), the description covers everything needed: what it does, when to use it, what it returns. No gaps.

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 valid descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add significant new parameter semantics beyond the schema, but it does reinforce that session_id is optional and links to veto_handoff.

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 uses specific verb 'restores' and resource 'session on any platform'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like veto_handoff (which likely handles saving) and veto_session_restore (which may have different focus). 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 'Call this immediately after switching platforms', providing clear context on when to use. Does not enumerate when not to use or alternative tools, but the guidance is sufficient for an AI agent to understand the typical use case.

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