Attach to DeepSeek Harness

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering non-destructive behavior. The description adds the 'never starts or modifies Harness' clarification, which reinforces but does not significantly extend those hints. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and a clear exclusion. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description captures core behavior and notes the prerequisite 'authorized workspace'. However, it does not mention return values, error conditions, or the impact of openBrowser beyond the schema description, leaving some operational gaps.

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 50%: openBrowser has a description, but workspace does not. The tool description does not add any parameter-level detail (e.g., what constitutes a valid workspace identity). It fails to compensate for the missing workspace documentation.

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 a specific verb ('attach') and resource ('authorized workspace to the existing Harness Host'), and explicitly clarifies it does not start or modify Harness. This distinguishes it from siblings like start_run and start_review without ambiguity.

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?

The description implies when to use it (to attach an authorized workspace to an existing host) and clarifies what it does not do (never starts or modifies Harness), but does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide conditions for choosing among related siblings. It relies on inference.

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