sdd-implement

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Begin implementation of approved tasks' without explaining side effects, required permissions, file modifications, or any operational consequences. This is insufficient for a mutating tool.

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 concise in length (one sentence) and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently minimal. It conveys only a vague action without enough detail to be useful.

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?

The tool has low parametric complexity, but no output schema and no annotations. The description is too sparse for an implementation tool; it does not state what 'begin implementation' entails, what artifacts are produced, or how to verify completion.

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 100% for the single parameter featureName, which is already described as 'Feature name under .spec/specs'. The main description adds no further meaning to the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a clear action ('Begin implementation') and a resource ('approved tasks'), which conveys the core purpose. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like sdd-spec-impl, which may also involve implementation.

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, prerequisites, or expected workflow steps. The phrase 'approved tasks' implies a dependency on prior approval but gives no explicit context.

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