check_veto_window

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

No annotations provided. The description explains the tool's behavior (checking veto window with condition) but does not detail side effects or return format. Adequate but not rich.

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. No waste, efficient.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It explains the tool's purpose and key condition, but lacks return value specification.

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% with a single parameter described. The description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema, which is sufficient for a simple parameter.

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 checks the veto window status of a strategy, with specific context about the 48-hour window and withdrawal condition. It distinguishes from siblings like 'veto_strategy' and 'feedback_strategy'.

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 implies when to use (checking strategy's veto eligibility) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. However, the context of siblings helps clarify its role.

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