distributeWork

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions distribution and executive access, but lacks details on side effects, synchronicity, or whether tasks are modified in place. This is insufficient for an action 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?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It does not elaborate on behavior or provide examples, so while not verbose, it is under-informative.

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 no output schema and limited annotations, the description should provide more context about the distribution process, error handling, or async behavior. It only hints at the executive restriction, leaving many important aspects unexplained.

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 described. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the load.

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 distributes tasks across multiple Managers, with an executive-only restriction. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'commit_manager_work' or 'executeParallel', but the purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 the tool is for distributing tasks and restricts usage to executives. However, it provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., 'executeParallel' for parallel execution) or when not to use it.

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