Capture a spark (approach motivation)

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

No annotations provided; description states it persists data but omits behavioral details like idempotency, side effects, or any destructive actions. With no annotations, the description should disclose more about the operation's nature.

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 wasted words, front-loaded with the core action and context. Efficient and clear.

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?

Effectively explains the tool's role in the workflow (evocation output, session memory) but does not describe return values or error behavior. Adequate given no output schema but could include completion signals.

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%, providing detailed explanations for each parameter. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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 the verb 'persist' and the resource 'candidate solution plus a concrete next step', and distinguishes from siblings like 'evoke' by positioning it as the output of a successful evocation.

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?

Provides context on when to use (after successful evocation) and the long-running issue progression use case, but does not explicitly exclude scenarios or compare with sibling 'update_spark'.

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