Assemble Profile JSON from Markdown Directory

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (writes), destructiveHint=false (non-destructive), and idempotentHint=false. The description adds that the tool writes a profile.json file and returns a success/error string. While it doesn't detail permissions or exact side effects, it aligns with annotations and provides basic behavioral context. The openWorldHint=true suggests no external dependencies are hidden, but the description lacks explicit statements about file system impact or required environment setup.

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 well-structured with headings (purpose, args, returns, examples) and bullet points, making it easy to scan. It front-loads the core purpose. However, it is somewhat verbose; the 'Args' section could be more concise since the schema already describes parameters. The examples are helpful but repeated phrases ('Use when') could be trimmed. Overall, it is efficient for a complex tool with many parameters.

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 description covers the tool's purpose, all parameters with descriptions, return value, and usage examples including contraindications. It does not explain the output file structure (e.g., profile.json contents) beyond being a JSON, but the output schema is marked as present. Given the complexity (1 complex param with many sub-params), the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly. Missing details like required trestle root setup or dependency on trestle_init are minor 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?

Although context signals report 0% schema description coverage (likely due to the top-level 'params' object lacking a description), the provided schema includes descriptions for each sub-property in the $defs. The description's 'Args' section reiterates all parameters with concise explanations and includes formatting hints (e.g., comma-separated for sections). This adds meaning beyond the schema, especially for optional parameters with defaults (e.g., set_parameters, regenerate). A slight deduction for not explaining the meaning of 'sections' in more detail.

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 assembles markdown controls into an OSCAL Profile JSON file. It specifies the verb 'assemble' and the resource 'Profile JSON from Markdown Directory', distinguishing it from siblings like profile_generate (which likely generates markdown from profile) and profile_resolve (which resolves profiles). The title and first sentence are 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 includes explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' examples, providing clear guidance on appropriate contexts (e.g., CI/CD assembly, parameter expansion) and contraindications (missing or malformed markdown). However, it does not directly compare to sibling tools like trestle_author_profile_generate or trestle_author_profile_resolve, which would further clarify when to choose this tool over alternatives.

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