rosh_show_program

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should fully disclose behavior. It does not mention idempotency, side effects, or what happens if the program is already visible. This is insufficient for a state-changing operation.

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 extremely concise with two sentences and an Args section. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and includes only necessary details.

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 low complexity (one parameter, one action) and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential functionality. However, it lacks behavioral details like error conditions or idempotency, which are expected for a mutation 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?

The input schema has a single parameter with no description. The description adds meaning by specifying the type ('Program ID (numeric) or slug (string)'), which compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 action ('make a hidden program visible again') on a specific resource ('program'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like rosh_hide_program.

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?

It mentions a prerequisite ('Requires API key with moderate scope') and describes the identifier parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it.

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