dialectic_mine_run

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not idempotent, not destructive. The description adds that it fires a 'mechanical capture pass' and explains the force parameter's effect. This adds some behavioral context beyond annotations, but does not disclose side effects or rate limits. Adequate given annotation presence.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the tool's action and key parameter behavior. No extraneous words; efficient and front-loaded.

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 tool has one boolean parameter and an output schema (external). The description explains the essential purpose and parameter nuance. It could be more complete by clarifying what happens when force=False or the default behavior, but it's sufficient for a simple tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the tool description compensates by explaining the 'force' parameter: 'force=True runs even when the miner daemon interval is 0'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type and default. No other parameters to document.

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 states 'Fire one mechanical capture pass now', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling dialectic_mine_status, though the jargon 'mechanical capture pass' may be unclear to some. Overall purpose is clear.

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 only gives guidance on when to use force=True ('runs even when the miner daemon interval is 0'). It does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like dialectic_mine_status or other dialectic tools. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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