Log a dispatch heartbeat

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

Annotations are present but the description adds critical context: the heartbeat is 'informational only and does not move the ticket’s status'. This transparency goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 moderately concise, with front-loaded purpose and clear structure. A few minor redundancies exist (e.g., 'informational only' repeated), but overall efficient.

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 logging tool, the description covers purpose, usage context, behavioral nuances, and examples. It fully explains the need for such a tool in the context of long dispatches and monitoring.

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 coverage is 67%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description mentions optional parameters (model, elapsed minutes, tokens) but does not add new semantic detail beyond what the schema already states.

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 the specific verb 'append' and resource 'in-flight progress ping', clearly distinguishing the tool from log_work. It states the purpose: to log a lightweight heartbeat during active dispatch for monitoring.

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 explicitly tells when to use (at natural milestones during long dispatches) and when not to use (not on every tool call). It contrasts with log_work, which is for completed work, providing clear guidance.

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