Capture Outcome

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description implies a write operation ('persist the Winner state') but does not add behavioral details like idempotency, side effects, or requirements. It does not contradict 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?

Single sentence with a clear tag and purpose. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with intent. Each sentence earns its place.

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 complexity (24 optional parameters, output schema exists), the description lacks guidance on how to construct input or what output to expect. It does not explain the meaning of parameters or the structure of the response, leaving gaps for the agent.

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% with 24 parameters. The description provides no information about any parameter, leaving the agent to infer from names and types alone.

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 for capturing mission summaries after completing tasks, fixing bugs, or making major decisions. It uses specific verb and resource ('capture outcome', 'persist Winner state'), distinguishing it from siblings like memory_store or diary_write.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: after completing a task, bug fix, or major architectural decision. However, it does not mention when not to use or alternatives, though the context is clear enough.

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