runrunit_suggest_devs_with_free_queue

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the tool suggests developers based on tasks and estimates, but omits details like how 'free queue' is calculated, whether it modifies data, or required permissions. This is adequate but lacks depth.

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?

A single sentence that efficiently communicates the core action and context. No filler or redundant words; the sentence is well-structured and front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 description lacks information about the output format (e.g., list of developers with ranking or details) and does not explain the computation logic. With no output schema, this gap significantly reduces completeness. Additionally, the complexity of 13 parameters is not addressed beyond the schema.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal semantics beyond the schema, simply repeating the concept of filters. The parameter descriptions in the schema are already detailed (e.g., load_strategy, task_stage_ids), so the tool's description does not significantly enhance understanding.

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 purpose: suggesting developers with the freest queue based on tasks in the Task column, considering estimates and optional filters. The verb 'suggests' and specific resource 'developers with freest queue' make it distinct from siblings, none of which offer similar suggestion functionality.

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 provides context for when to use the tool (when needing to suggest developers based on task queue), includes mention of optional filters, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives. Given no sibling tool offers the same capability, this omission is acceptable.

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