bernstein_approve

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states the task is marked complete and returns JSON, but lacks details on idempotency, permissions, or side effects (e.g., irreversible actions).

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 concise (4 sentences), front-loaded with the main action, and well-structured with explicit Args and Returns sections. No unnecessary words.

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 only 2 parameters, an output schema present, and clear purpose, the description is mostly adequate. However, it misses behavioral details like idempotency or prerequisites, which would improve completeness.

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?

The description explains both parameters beyond schema titles: task_id as 'ID of the task to approve' and note as 'Optional approval note recorded as the result summary.' This adds value given 0% schema description coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Approve a pending or blocked task, marking it complete.' It specifies the resource (task) and the condition (pending or blocked). This distinguishes it from siblings like bernstein_stop or bernstein_run.

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?

The description explicitly says 'when a task is awaiting human sign-off before proceeding,' providing clear context for use. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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