Move report between states

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), description adds that it is a write operation, idempotent (no-op on current status), rejects illegal transitions, and returns updated report. No contradictions.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with core action, concise with no wasted words. Usage guidance at the end is well-placed.

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?

Covers return format, behavioral traits (idempotency, rejection), and usage distinctions. No gaps despite lack of output 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 coverage is 100%, but description adds clarity by listing valid target statuses (excluding pending and resolved, which are in enum but likely invalid), and implies reason parameter is for audit trail. This goes beyond schema.

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 moves a report to a new workflow state, listing valid targets and return value. It distinguishes from siblings like merge_fix and reopen_report.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool (dismiss duplicate, mark fixed) and when to use alternatives (merge_fix for merged PR, reopen_report for reopened path). Also notes idempotency and illegal transition rejection.

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