codex_plan

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the collaborative nature and output ('concrete approach with trade-offs and alternatives'), but lacks details on potential destructive actions, permission requirements, error handling, or session behavior. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences, no extraneous words. Front-loaded with the core purpose. Perfectly concise for the tool's complexity.

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?

Tool has 8 parameters and no output schema. Description explains the purpose and high-level outcome but does not detail the return values (e.g., format of the plan), pagination, or behavior under different constraints. Adequate but incomplete for a comprehensive understanding.

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% (all 8 parameters described thoroughly). The description only mentions 'problem' and 'constraints', adding no additional meaning beyond the schema. With full coverage, 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?

Description clearly states 'Collaboratively plan an implementation' and specifies the process: describe problem and constraints, get concrete approach with trade-offs and alternatives. The verb 'plan' and resource 'implementation' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like codex_ask and codex_debug.

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 planning phases ('Describe the problem and constraints'), but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives. It provides clear context for when to use, earning a 4.

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