aiworkhub_storage_recover_stranded_worktrees

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well: default behavior mutates nothing, confirm=True reinstates provably-owned registrations, requires a reason, and records that reason in the audit log. This gives an agent the key safety and audit behavior before invocation.

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 purpose and read-only first guidance are front-loaded and easy to scan. The NF-2026-00279 background paragraph is somewhat extraneous for invocation, though it explains why the tool exists and does not obscure the operational guidance.

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 output schema, return-value details need not be restated, and the description covers the important mutation modes, audit behavior, and ownership constraint. It could mention permissions or prerequisites, but it is otherwise sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does for both parameters: confirm controls read-only versus mutating mode, and reason is required specifically when confirm=True. It could add more detail about acceptable reason content, but the core semantics are covered.

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 states a specific verb and resource: recovering retained worktrees stranded outside reclamation paths. It is clearly distinct from storage purge/quarantine/prune siblings by focusing on reinstating registrations, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool.

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?

It clearly explains the two usage modes: confirm=False returns a read-only report, while confirm=True performs recovery and requires a non-empty reason. It does not state when to prefer a different sibling tool or when not to use this one.

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