aiworkhub_dashboard_terminal_log_quarantine

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does so well: it states confirm=True plus a matching preview_digest are required, that files go into a quarantine batch with an undo window (reversible), that an audit event is recorded, and that storage telemetry is invalidated. These are exactly the side-effect details an agent needs before a destructive-adjacent write.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope, then prerequisites, then effects — a sensible ordering. The second sentence is a long multi-clause run-on packing prerequisites and side effects together, which is efficient but slightly dense.

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 two-parameter write tool with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers prerequisites, required confirmation, reversibility/undo window, audit recording, and downstream telemetry invalidation. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, so both confirm and preview_digest are already explained in the schema, including stale-digest fail-closed behavior. The description restates the confirm=True and digest-matching requirements but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the structured fields, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (move) and resource (terminal process log files matching a current preview) with explicit scope (repo-local quarantine). The 'USER WRITE' prefix and eligibility qualifier let an agent distinguish this from retention_preview, restore, and purge siblings without opening schemas.

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 explicit ordering prerequisites: call aiworkhub_dashboard_terminal_log_retention_preview first for preview_digest, and run usage_backfill first if uncaptured usage receipts protect logs. It also names the undo path (aiworkhub_dashboard_terminal_log_restore), leaving nothing to inference.

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