Stage Note

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

With no annotations the description carries the full load, and it does disclose meaningful behavior: the destination file, that the card counts notes newer than the running code, and that only the most important are surfaced. It stops short of stating whether entries are appended vs overwritten, or any permission requirements.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and destination, then the level semantics. Dense but each clause carries information; the nested parenthetical for 'critical' is slightly awkward but not wasteful.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, and the mutation model of the updates card is explained. However, for a 3-parameter write tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations, leaving 'scenes' and 'title' undefined is a meaningful gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does well for 'level', enumerating normal/important/critical with color and decision criteria that the schema lacks (no enum is defined), but 'title' and 'scenes' — including the required 'scenes' — are never explained.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('log a change to the stage' for the 'updates ready' card) with concrete storage location (updates.json in <scenes>/_stage). An agent can tell this writes a note rather than reading or clearing one, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the similarly named sibling stage_take_note.

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?

'Write it when the change lands' gives a timing trigger, which is real usage guidance. But there is no when-not guidance, no mention of alternative tools for note-taking (notes_write, stage_take_note), and no statement of prerequisites such as needing the scene to exist.

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