plur_sync

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint and non-destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral detail: git operations (commit, push, pull), repo initialization, and the drop-and-rebuild with full=true, all consistent with annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: overall purpose, first vs subsequent calls, and parameter-specific guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core action.

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 two optional params, no output schema, and good annotations, the description covers main behavior, lifecycle, and recovery. Could mention return values or error cases, but not essential for this tool's complexity.

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% with descriptions. The description adds a bit of context (e.g., 'recovery path' for full), but does not significantly augment the schema's parameter documentation. 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?

The description opens with a clear, specific action: 'Sync engrams via git AND refresh the derived index from YAML.' It names the resource (engrams), mechanism (git), and distinct behavior (index refresh), differentiating from siblings like plur_sync_status.

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 explicit guidance: first call initializes repo, remote URL enables cross-device sync, subsequent calls commit/push/pull, and full=true is for recovery. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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