guardian_baseline

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

Given no annotations, the description covers basic behavior (create records state, compare shows drift) but lacks details on side effects, prerequisites (e.g., compare needing prior create), or permissions. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words, efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and usage.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers essential functionality and parameter usage. Minor gap: does not explicitly state that 'compare' requires a prior baseline, though this might be inferred.

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 meaning to the 'action' parameter beyond the schema's enum/default (explains what each action does), and the 'components' parameter already has a schema description. With 50% schema coverage, the description compensates well.

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 creates or compares a security baseline snapshot, specifying two distinct actions (create and compare) with clear outcomes.

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?

It explains when to use each action (record state vs. report drift), but does not explicitly discuss when not to use or compare with sibling tools like guardian_scan or guardian_audit.

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