tracked_recompute

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

No annotations provided, but the description thoroughly explains the snapshot and diff process, including the four categories of reported changes. Does not mention potential side effects or performance, but sufficiently details the behavioral mechanism.

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?

Well-structured with a clear opening, bulleted list for output, and a separate Args section. Concise without superfluous words.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers input, behavior, and output format. No gaps remain.

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?

Only parameter is doc_name. Schema provides no description, but the description adds 'Document name. Empty string uses the active document.', which adds essential meaning beyond schema defaults.

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?

Clearly states 'Recompute a document and track what changed' with specific output metrics. Distinguishes itself from a raw recompute by highlighting the tracking capability.

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?

Explicitly advises 'Use this instead of raw recompute to understand the impact of changes', providing clear guidance on when to select this tool over alternatives.

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