distill_journal_commit_upgrades

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'Updates journal_meta.status_latest to mark as upgraded' but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permissions, or whether it is destructive. For a write operation, this is insufficient.

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, no filler, front-loaded with purpose and usage context. Every word earns its place.

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 simple single-parameter input and no output schema, the description covers the workflow context (post-subagent) and effect. Minor gap: no mention of error handling or idempotency, but sufficient for its simplicity.

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 only parameter 'task_slugs' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no further meaning beyond 'affect task slugs,' so 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 clearly states the tool updates journal_meta.status_latest after subagents upgrade entries, specifying the verb (call/mark), resource (journal entries), and action (upgrade). It distinguishes from siblings like distill_journal by placing it as a follow-up step.

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: 'After dispatching subagents...call this with the affected task slugs.' Provides clear context but lacks exclusions or mention of alternatives. The sibling distill_journal likely precedes, but no direct comparison.

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