mark_lecture_incomplete

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states that the operation writes to local storage but does not mention side effects, reversibility, idempotency, return values, or required preconditions. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, making it extremely concise and easy to parse.

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?

Even though the tool is simple, it is a write operation with no annotations and no output schema. The description leaves the agent without information about failure behavior, whether the lecture must already exist, or what 'incomplete' implies in relation to other statuses. This is not enough for safe invocation.

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 0% and the description does not mention lecture_id at all. The description adds no meaning beyond the bare parameter name in the schema, so it fails to compensate for the lack of schema 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 ('Mark') and names the exact resource and state change ('lecture as incomplete'), plus the storage context ('local storage'). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool mark_lecture_completed, so an agent can immediately tell which operation this is.

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 (when you need to change a lecture's state to incomplete) but provides no explicit guidance about when to choose this over mark_lecture_completed or any prerequisites. No alternative tools are mentioned.

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