humsana_safe_write_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the Cognitive Interlock protection, the threshold (>30 lines while user is tired), the blocking behavior, and the fallback to a review folder. This gives the agent transparency about side effects beyond a simple 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?

Three sentences with no filler. Each sentence conveys essential information: purpose, behavioral safeguard, and usage direction. Ideal length.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, safety behavior, and output-less nature adequately. It explains what happens on a blocked write and the override mechanism, which is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly despite the lack of an 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. The description does not add parameter semantics beyond the schema; it mentions the interlock condition but does not elaborate on filepath or content formatting.

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 'Write content to a file' and identifies the resource and action. It also declares 'Use this for ALL file write operations,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle commands or checks.

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 instructs to use this tool for all file write operations, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like safe_execute_command, so it lacks exclusions.

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