set_decision_flag

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

Discloses that it writes a single amendment record to .codevira/decisions.jsonl, which goes beyond annotations (which only indicate not read-only and not destructive). This adds meaningful behavioral context about side effects.

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 with zero waste. Front-loaded with version and clear action. Every sentence earns its place, distinguishing from sibling and describing behavior.

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?

For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, behavioral side effect (file write), and parameter intent. No gaps remain given the annotations and schema coverage.

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 each parameter described. The tool description adds high-level context but does not enhance understanding of individual parameters beyond the schema. 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 states it performs a lightweight flag/tag update on an existing decision, specifying the exact resources (tags, do_not_revert, is_outdated) and distinguishes itself from supersede_decision by avoiding a full rewrite. This is a specific verb+resource+scope with clear sibling differentiation.

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 states when to use ('only need to toggle do_not_revert or correct a tag list') and when not to ('for semantic rewrites use supersede_decision'), providing clear context and an alternative tool.

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