warm_sudo_cache

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states that it 'warm[s] sudo credentials using server-managed gopass sudo password.' It does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it requires a TTY, modifies session state, or has rate limits). The output schema exists but is not referenced, missing an opportunity to clarify return behavior.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff, but it is overly concise. It could benefit from additional context, such as prerequisites or typical usage, without becoming verbose. The structure is simple and front-loaded, but the brevity sacrifices clarity.

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 specific purpose and the presence of sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., an active SSH session), what happens if the cache is already warm, or how to interpret the output. The output schema is not referenced in the description, leaving the agent without guidance on return values.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no parameter details. It does not explain that 'session_id' likely identifies an SSH session or that 'timeout' is in seconds. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation, leaving the agent to guess parameter semantics.

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's purpose: to warm sudo credentials using a gopass password. The verb 'warm' is specific to the action of pre-authenticating sudo. The tool is distinguished from siblings like 'check_sudo_cache' and 'clear_sudo_cache', which handle different aspects of sudo cache management.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'check_sudo_cache' and 'clear_sudo_cache', the description should clarify scenarios for each, e.g., proactive warming vs checking status. The current description implies usage but does not explicitly state context or exclusions.

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