apply_migration_plan

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behavior by stating 'fully transactional' and 'atomically', implying atomic commit/rollback. However, it does not specify whether locks are acquired, what happens on failure, or the effect on the ledger row beyond atomicity.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and immediately actionable.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It fails to explain the review_hash requirement, timeout meaning, or what the tool returns on success/failure, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 adds no detail about parameters (name, steps, review_hash, timeouts) beyond what the schema provides. Schema coverage is 60%, but the description does not compensate for the missing descriptions of timeout_seconds and lock_timeout_seconds.

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 uses a specific verb ('apply') and resource ('migration plan'), and adds the qualifiers 'reviewed', 'fully transactional', and 'ledger row atomically', which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_migration_plan and rollback_migration.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_migration_plan, rollback_migration). The description does not mention prerequisites or context for invocation.

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