send_directive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions creating tasks with dependencies but does not address authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or what happens upon creation. For an 8-parameter tool, this is insufficient.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it lacks structure or front-loading of key details; for example, it could separate the core action from the batch capability. Still, it is efficient for its length.

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 has 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or how batch creation works. A more thorough description is needed for full context.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the description adds limited value. It mentions 'single or batch tasks with dependencies,' providing minor context for 'blockedBy' and 'dependsOn', but does not explain parameter formats or usage 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 function: sending task directives to the development team with dependency handling. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'send_batch_directives' by covering both single and batch tasks.

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 for creating directives with dependencies but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus other similar tools like 'send_batch_directives' or 'create_ticket'. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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