sc_checkpoint

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only says 'create or restore' without disclosing effects like potential overwriting on restore, saved state scope, or side effects. The missing 'list' action also creates ambiguity about available behaviors.

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?

A single concise sentence with the action front-loaded. It is efficient but under-specified by omitting the 'list' enum value from the schema, making it not fully complete.

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?

The tool has three distinct actions (create, restore, list) but the description only mentions two. No output schema, no annotations, and no behavioral details make this incomplete for an agent to use reliably.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions (name and action), so baseline is 3. The description adds 'git checkpoint' context but does not elaborate how name and action interact beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Create or restore' and resource 'git checkpoint', clearly indicating it manages git checkpoints. However, it omits the 'list' action available in the schema, so it's not fully accurate but still clear.

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?

No guidance on when to use sc_checkpoint versus sibling tools like sc_git. No prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions are mentioned.

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