distill

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

Annotations are all false (no readOnly, idempotent, destructive hints), and the description does not compensate by clarifying behavioral traits. It implies a write operation but omits safety, idempotency, or side-effect details critical for agent decision-making.

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 very concise—three sentences plus formatted enum lists. Every sentence adds value, front-loading the purpose and contextual information without 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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and the tool's moderate complexity, the description covers purpose, parameter enums, and pipeline connections. It could be improved by mentioning side effects or return value, but it is largely sufficient.

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 description adds meaning by listing allowed values for `kind` and `confidence`, and noting that `source_thread` is optional. It primarily covers 3 of 4 parameters but lacks detail on `content` format.

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 the tool marks content as worth carrying forward, using a clear verb and resource. It provides specific categories (insight, pattern, etc.) and mentions related tools (vote_distill, export_distillates), establishing its role in a pipeline.

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 outlines the overall distillation workflow (voting, exporting) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like compost or when not to use it. It provides context but lacks exclusions or direct comparisons.

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