change_to_stage

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses auto-fetching of eTag but omits critical behaviors like the default cleanup of processes (cleanupProcesses defaults to true) and prerequisites/permissions. The description lacks depth on side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose. A bit more structure could help, but it is efficient and avoids verbosity.

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 complexity of 6 parameters including nested sessionCredentials and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or the effect of the stage change on the case workflow.

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% and the description adds moderate value beyond the schema (e.g., eTag auto-fetch behavior). However, for most parameters like caseID and viewType, the description adds little new information.

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 'Change to a specified stage of a case' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'change_to_next_stage' by specifying 'based on stageID passed' and allowing navigation to any valid stage (primary, alternate).

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 usage for manual stage selection but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'change_to_next_stage'. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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