veto_snapshot

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

With empty annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explicitly states 'read-only call' and lists the data it returns. However, it does not mention potential side effects or rate limits, though likely none.

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, no redundancy, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The description lists all major components returned (session, verdict, patterns, etc.), which compensates for the lack of an output schema. Some details about exact keys or format are missing but acceptable given the tool's purpose.

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?

The single optional parameter 'top' is well-described in the schema ('How many top learned patterns to include...'). The description adds no further meaning, so 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 returns the whole Veto state for editor HUD/statusline in one read-only call, listing specific components. This distinguishes it from siblings that return only individual parts.

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 for editor integrations and notes the output shapes match CLI statusline. It could be more explicit about when to use this vs. sibling tools, but the context is clear enough.

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