cronos_scrivi_fine_giornata

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It states it writes a file, takes content and optional date, and returns a confirmation with the file path. This is sufficient for an agent to understand the action, though it could explicitly mention overwrite 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 concise (4 sentences) with a clear structure: purpose, usage instruction, parameter list, return value. Every sentence adds value, and the critical usage order is front-loaded.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what the tool does, when to use it (after cronos_fine_giornata), required/optional parameters, and the return type. No critical gaps.

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 both parameters well-described. The description repeats the schema descriptions exactly, adding no additional meaning or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Scrive il file di fine giornata con il contenuto generato.' It specifies the verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tool cronos_fine_giornata by noting the sequence order.

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 explicitly directs to use this tool AFTER cronos_fine_giornata: 'Usa questo tool DOPO cronos_fine_giornata: prima generi il contenuto ... poi chiami questo tool.' This provides clear when-to-use guidance and implies when not to use (before generating content).

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