개발 일지 발행

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action (publish to DB) without mentioning idempotency, overwriting behavior, authentication needs, error conditions, or any side effects. This is insufficient 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and target. Every word is meaningful, and there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, and the presence of 6 parameters including an enum, the description does not provide enough context. It omits return values, error behavior, status effects, and operational prerequisites, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to any parameter beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., format hints, defaults, or usage context).

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 states the verb 'publishes' and the resource 'completed development log' to the 'existing Notion Blog DB'. It is clear what the tool does, but with no sibling tools, differentiation is not applicable, so it scores 4 per rubric.

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 includes '완성된' (completed), which implies the tool should be used when the development log is finished. However, it provides no explicit when-not-to-use instructions, prerequisites, or alternative tools, so guidance is only implied.

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