add_phase

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

Annotations only show non-readonly and non-destructive. The description adds that it inserts phases, with high-priority at the front, implying additive behavior. More behavioral context than annotations alone provide.

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, front-loaded with main purpose, no wasted words.

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?

With 7 parameters and no output schema, description is brief. It explains insertion but not effects on existing phases, dependencies, or return value. Adequate but has gaps.

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 high (86%), so baseline 3. Description only adds meaning for 'priority' by noting insertion ordering; other params rely on schema descriptions.

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 'Add a new upcoming phase to the roadmap' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like 'bulk_import_phases' by targeting single-phase addition.

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?

Explicitly says when to call: 'when you identify new work during a session — gaps, refactors, follow-ups'. Also notes insertion ordering for high-priority phases, but does not exclude when not to use it (e.g., vs bulk import).

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