dashclaw_invoke

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the call is guarded (policy check), executed (HTTP call), and recorded (audit trail) automatically. It also mentions the fallback identity mechanism. Missing details on error handling or failure modes, but covers essential behaviors well.

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?

Four sentences: main action, what happens (guard, execute, record), when to use vs. alternatives, and a prerequisite action. Every sentence earns its place, front-loaded with the core purpose. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, describing the return value would be beneficial but not critical. The description covers the input, behavior, and usage context. The tool has nested objects, but the schema handles those. Slightly incomplete due to lack of output description, but still very good.

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 100%, and each parameter has a clear description in the schema. The description adds context about the overall governance process but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states the verb (invoke), resource (DashClaw-governed capability/external API), and scope (guarded, executed, recorded). It distinguishes from direct HTTP calls and the sibling tool dashclaw_capabilities_list by explicitly contrasting usage. No tautology or vagueness.

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 says to use this instead of making direct HTTP calls when the target API is registered as a DashClaw capability. Also advises to call dashclaw_capabilities_list first to discover available capability IDs, providing clear when-to-use and prerequisites.

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