Promote an idea to a todo

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It describes locking the idea and posting an event, but lacks details on error handling, return value, or additional behavioral traits like idempotency or rate limits.

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 concise with four sentences, each adding value. It front-loads the core action and then provides conditions and effects without unnecessary fluff.

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 description lacks information about the return value (no output schema) and error scenarios. Given no output schema, it should at least hint at what is returned, making it incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 only explains agent_id, leaving idea_id, priority, and assigned_to_agent_id without any semantic context beyond the 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 it converts an idea to a todo and locks the idea, with specific conditions and side effects. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_todo and create_idea.

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 mentions prerequisite conditions (net upvotes >= 1 or admin caller), providing context for when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like vote_on_idea.

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