Open Kioku Propose Patch

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

Description reinforces annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) by stating 'Read-only; does not write any files.' Adds no new behavioral nuance beyond annotations, but is consistent and clear.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose and key constraint (read-only). Usage guidance follows naturally.

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 one parameter and output schema present, description adequately covers purpose and usage. Could optionally mention output structure but not required given output schema.

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 documentation covers 100% of the single parameter (task). Description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema's description.

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?

Explicitly states verb 'propose' and resource 'patch plan' with clarification that it is read-only and does not write files. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like plan_change (evidence-backed) and apply_patch (write).

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use (drafting patch plan without modifying files) and when-not-to-use (prefer plan_change for evidence, apply_patch only after approval in write mode). Names specific alternatives.

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