resolve

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 transparently discloses a key side effect: 'This removes the marker from the browser on next page load.' This goes beyond a generic mutation statement by specifying both the removal and the timing, though it does not address edge cases like invalid IDs or idempotency.

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 consists of two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action and add a valuable detail about the side effect. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: the action and the timing of the visible effect. While it doesn't describe return values or error handling, the simplicity of the tool makes this acceptable.

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% with the parameter 'id' described as 'The annotation ID to resolve.' The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond this, so the baseline of 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 the action: 'Mark an annotation as resolved.' This is a specific verb+resource construction that distinguishes it from siblings (get_all_pending, get_screenshot) by focusing on resolution rather than listing or capturing.

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 provides clear context for the tool's purpose via the verb 'resolve' and the sibling tool names, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. This matches a 'clear context, no exclusions' score.

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