Generate remediation payload

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this by stating 'Generates text only; it opens nothing.' This adds behavioral clarity beyond the annotation, confirming no side effects. No contradictions or missing relevant behavioral details for a simple generation tool.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and contents, followed by usage context and side-effect clarification. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 a single parameter, 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and simple read-only behavior, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it produces, and how to use the result. It is complete for its complexity.

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%: the only parameter 'rank' is described as 'Chokepoint rank from chokepoint_rank'. The description does not add extra parameter semantics, but the schema fully defines the parameter, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action ('Generates text only') with a specific resource ('remediation payload for a chokepoint') and lists contents (summary, justification, change plan, rollback note). It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing ticket-readiness and that it 'opens nothing.'

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 gives clear context: use when a ticket-ready remediation payload is needed, to paste into Jira/ServiceNow or hand to a ticketing MCP. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the focus on text generation and 'opens nothing' helps disambiguate from action-oriented siblings.

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