sc_migrate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that flags like --plan, --execute, --rollback, or --validate control migration phases, any side effects (e.g., schema changes), or the need for evidence/persona.

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 description is concise (one short phrase), but this brevity is under-specification, not efficient structure. It omits all operational detail and fails to leverage the available flag semantics.

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?

Despite having 4 parameters, nested objects, and a rich set of migration flags, the description provides only a vague scope. No output format, migration workflow, or relationship to code/database changes is explained. Sibling tools imply a CLI context, but this description is far from complete.

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 schema fully describes all four parameters (args, flags, persona, evidence), and the description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema is comprehensive.

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 identifies the tool's domain ('Database and code migrations') and uses 'Migration assistance' to imply a helping role. However, it lacks a specific verb like 'plan', 'execute', or 'manage', and does not differentiate from siblings beyond the migration topic.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus other siblings like sc_build or sc_deploy. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided.

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