qllm_heavy_render

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

Annotations indicate not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent. Description adds context about writing to disk (report_base_dir defaults to ~/Downloads/heavyskill-reports), which is useful beyond annotations.

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: one for purpose, one for args and returns. Concise but the args line is a bit dense; could be split for readability.

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?

Despite having a complex input schema with nested objects, the description is thin. It does not explain error handling, file output behavior, or the relationship between traces and synthesis. Output schema exists but description doesn't clarify return structure.

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 description coverage is 0%. Description provides a high-level summary of the params (Question, mode, traces, synthesis, etc.) but lacks detailed semantics for each field.

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 the tool renders a Codex-hosted HeavySkill synthesis to Markdown and HTML. The verb 'render' and resource are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like qllm_heavy_discuss or qllm_chat.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, when-not to use, or comparison with sibling tools.

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