log_progress

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool appends a note (a mutation) and that the note is timestamped, which is useful behavioral context. It does not mention edge cases like creating the log if absent, but the core behavior is clear.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is a natural continuation.

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, the description is complete enough: it states the action, when to use it, and the note content. The lack of an output schema is acceptable given the tool's simplicity, and sibling names help orient the agent functionally.

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 already describes both parameters fully (100% coverage). The description adds minor context by mentioning 'timestamped note' and 'today', but no substantial parameter semantics are added beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Append') and resource ('today's work log'), and distinguishes it from read-oriented siblings like read_day and list_days. Mentioning 'timestamped note' adds further specificity.

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 gives usage scenarios: 'after completing a step, making a decision, or hitting a blocker.' It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is clear and practical.

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