justhandled_npm_publish_payload_preflight

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds useful behavioral context by disclosing the $0.05 cost and the specific checks performed. However, it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, whether data is sent externally, or what the nature of 'baseline drift' comparison entails.

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, front-loaded with purpose and followed by cost. Every word earns its place and is concise.

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 has moderate complexity with 3 parameters (one nested object) and no output schema. The description covers the core check and cost, but omits details about return values, interpretation of results, and more thorough input guidance. It is adequate but not complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It gives context that 'package' is an npm manifest and hints at 'baseline drift' relating to previous_files, but does not explain the structure of the package object, the format of pack_files, or explicitly map 'previous_files' to baseline drift. Insufficient for an agent to correctly construct all parameters.

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 a specific verb 'Check' with a clear resource ('npm pack manifest') and lists specific checks (missing entrypoints, absent runtime output, sensitive files, baseline drift). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling preflight tools, which target other domains.

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 clearly indicates the tool is for npm package preflight checks, and the sibling tools are all distinct domains, so context is clear. However, it does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or when not to use it.

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