jade.declare_command

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly states that declaring an existing name replaces it, that commands persist across sessions, and that the file is reviewed like any change. This is strong for a mutation tool, though it stops short of discussing permissions, reversibility, or result output.

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 filler. The action and target lead, followed by the critical caveat about replacing existing names and not redeclaring just to run. Every phrase 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?

The tool is simple and the schema covers all parameters, while the description covers persistence, overwrite behavior, and reviewability, and routes usage to run_command. It does not describe return values or errors, but that gap is minor given the straightforward mutation and clear parameter schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds overall context about persistence and replacement but does not enrich the meaning of individual parameters beyond what the schema already documents.

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 names a specific verb and resource: declare a named command in .jade/commands.json. It also states the purpose, running it with run_command in this and later sessions, and the caution against redeclaring just to run distinguishes it from its sibling run_command.

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?

It clearly says declarations are meant to be run via run_command and warns not to redeclare an existing command just to execute it, implying one-off execution should go to run_command instead. It does not explicitly enumerate when to use remove or other siblings, but the core usage context is present.

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