Append a research finding

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

Discloses important behaviors (creates doc on first call, appends later, findings accrue in kb) beyond the minimal annotations, though could mention potential side effects or error conditions.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Sufficient for a simple append tool given no output schema; covers creation vs appending and durability, but could elaborate on ticket existence assumptions or rate limits.

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?

Adds little beyond the input schema; the 'finding' description is already present in the schema, and 'project' remains undefined. Schema coverage is moderate (67%), so description should compensate more.

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 clearly states 'Capture ONE research finding into a ticket's durable research doc' with a specific verb and resource, and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool append_scratchpad.

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 'Prefer this over append_scratchpad' and advises calling it repeatedly during research, giving clear when-to-use/not-to-use guidance.

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