init_loop

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions creating a file, but does not specify whether an existing file would be overwritten, what content the file initially contains, or any side effects on the session. This ambiguity is significant for a mutation tool.

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?

A single, direct sentence that conveys the core purpose without redundancy or fluff. It is appropriately front-loaded and 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?

The tool is relatively simple with only 2 parameters and no output schema, but the description lacks important context such as what happens if the session already has an active loop, error handling, or confirmation of successful initialization. It meets the minimum viability but leaves 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?

The input schema already fully describes both parameters (objective and session_id) with clear descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond mapping 'given session' to the session_id parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 creates a new .md loop state file to start a continuous autonomous task, using a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from resume_loop by focusing on initialization rather than continuation.

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 phrase 'to start a continuous, autonomous task' gives clear context for when to use this tool (initial setup). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like resume_loop or when not to use it, but the sibling tool naming makes the distinction obvious.

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