apply_algorithm_aide_config

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'safely' and 'verify readback' but omits side effects, failure modes, permissions, and the meaning of key parameters like restartAlgorithmAide and dryRun. The description is too sparse for safe agent usage.

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?

At one sentence, the description is too brief for a tool with 8 parameters and complex behavior. It omits critical information, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 8 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and nested objects, the description provides almost no actionable information. An agent cannot determine how to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the description must compensate. It fails entirely, offering no explanation for any of the 8 parameters, including the required targetPackage or the nested objects configJson, configPatch, hookSpec.

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 it writes a config file for a package and verifies readback, specifying the file path pattern. It is specific and actionable, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like reset_target_config or apply_hook_profile.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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