Release Quarantine

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds real context on top: the state transition to Released, the recorded releaser identity, retained history, and the practical consequence that the test's failures will fail the build again. It does not cover idempotency or failure modes, but it goes beyond the annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the permission gate and then the state-change consequence. No filler and no restatement of the title or schema.

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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential outcome (Released state, releaser attribution, history retained) and the risk of re-enabling build failures. Minor gaps remain on permissions/error behavior, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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% and both parameters are documented in the schema, including the provenance hint for quarantine_id. The description adds no parameter-level detail (no mention of what identifies the target or how the releaser is derived), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource pair ('End a quarantine') and describes the concrete outcome: build failures resume, quarantine enters the Released state with the caller recorded as releaser. It does not, however, distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as update_quarantine or quarantine_tests.

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?

Gives an explicit usage gate ('Call this only when the user asks for it'), which functions as a when-to-use and an implied when-not-to-use rule for an agent acting autonomously. It stops short of naming the alternative tools an agent might otherwise reach for.

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