vcv_live

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

No annotations provided, and the description only mentions the return format but does not disclose side effects, destructive behavior, permissions, or other behavioral traits. Without annotations, the description carries full burden but fails to provide any transparency.

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 short but inefficient: it uses a cryptic term 'portmanteau' and includes a return format and examples that, while helpful, are not structured to immediately convey the tool's core function.

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 lack of annotations, rich input schema, and no structured output schema (only free-text examples), the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain the two operations, the purpose of patch_id, and the full return value.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters `operation` and `patch_id`. The examples show valid values but do not clarify what each operation does or what `patch_id` represents.

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 mentions 'Live performance portmanteau — address_map, performance_sheet' and provides examples, indicating it performs two specific operations. However, the term 'portmanteau' is vague and doesn't clearly state the tool's overall purpose as a verb-resource combination.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like vcv_patch or vcv_catalog. The description does not indicate prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or which operation to choose when.

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