telys_compact

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=true, and the description adds value by explaining what is destroyed (tombstones and merged delta segments, not live data) and confirming 'the store is persisted.' It also details the no-op repeat behavior and the missing-collection failure, going beyond the annotation flags.

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 action statement is front-loaded, followed by usage timing, idempotency, and failure behavior. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler, though the density slightly reduces skimmability.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what, when, idempotency, side effects, and failure mode. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly; only minor details like prerequisites beyond collection existence are omitted.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, and it only partially does: 'Required: collection' restates the schema's required field, and 'Fails when the collection does not exist' implies collection is the target name. It does not elaborate on format, naming rules, or acceptable values, leaving meaning mostly inferable.

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 uses specific verbs and resources: 'flush tombstones' and 'merge the delta segment into the base layout' to reclaim space. This clearly distinguishes a storage-maintenance operation from its siblings (search, add, delete, stats), so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 trigger condition: 'Use after large delete or update batches.' It also states the no-op behavior on repeat and the failure mode for missing collections. It does not name sibling alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough to route correct usage.

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