release_explain

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 states the tool is 'advisory' and reads logs, indicating a non-destructive read operation. However, it lacks details on required permissions, side effects, or rate limits.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action. No redundant or extraneous 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?

While the tool has an output schema, the description omits parameter details and does not fully explain the input context. It is adequate for an experienced user but incomplete for an agent lacking domain knowledge.

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%, and the description does not explain the two parameters ('node', 'coordinate'). Without any parameter guidance, the agent cannot infer their meaning or format.

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 explains why a node's pipeline failed by reading the failed job's log. It uses a specific verb ('explain') and resource ('why a node's pipeline failed'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like release_status or release_report.

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 implies use when a node's pipeline fails, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it. The advisory note clarifies it's a read operation, but no direct comparison to siblings is provided.

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