purge_devices_preview

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

Beyond annotations marking it as read-only and idempotent, the description adds that it returns the candidate set and explicitly states 'Read-only — no DB write', providing additional safety context. No contradiction with annotations.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, including the project context tag 'Phase 44 D-11'. No unnecessary words.

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 the tool is a simple preview with full schema coverage and annotations, the description provides enough context about its return value ('candidate set'). The lack of output schema is compensated by the clear purpose. Could mention return format briefly, but not essential.

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 input schema provides full coverage (100%) with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which is already sufficient. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 is a preview of purge_devices, explaining it returns the candidate set without persisting. It distinguishes itself as read-only and non-destructive, differentiating it from the destructive purge_devices sibling.

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 usage as a preview before running purge_devices. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternatives, but the read-only and preview nature is clear enough for an agent.

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