next_distillation

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds the crucial side effect that new records are attributed to the leased session until complete_distillation, which an agent could not infer from annotations. It also enumerates what comes back (transcript digest, prior records, sources, theses). It stops short of saying whether the lease expires or how to release it.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and its scope. The middle sentence enumerating return contents is partly redundant given an output schema exists, which is the only waste.

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?

Good coverage of the lease lifecycle and the anti-duplication instruction, and return values need not be restated thanks to the output schema. However, for a leasing tool it omits two things an agent needs: what happens when no session is waiting, and whether the lease can expire or be abandoned.

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?

There is one parameter, transcript_chars, with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. The name, default 60000, and 5000-200000 bounds are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does nothing to explain what the value controls (truncation of the returned digest).

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Lease the oldest research session waiting to be distilled into the graph.' The notion of leasing the oldest pending session is concrete enough to distinguish it from siblings like next_mapping or complete_distillation, though it never names the closest alternative explicitly.

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?

Gives clear lifecycle context: the lease persists 'until `complete_distillation`', and the returned prior records come with the instruction 'don't duplicate it'. That tells the agent how to use the result and what the follow-up call is, but there is no explicit when-not guidance or comparison to next_mapping.

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