undo_pick

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Remove the most recent pick') but does not elaborate on side effects, reversibility, or impact on draft state. For a mutation tool, this is a modest disclosure but not rich enough to anticipate all consequences.

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, tightly-written sentence that includes the action, target ('most recent pick'), and a motivating use case. Every word earns its place, and it is immediately clear what the tool does.

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's simplicity (zero parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers its main purpose and typical trigger. It could optionally mention any limitations (e.g., cannot undo if no picks exist) but is generally sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 as per instructions. The description adds no parameter information because there are none to describe. It correctly focuses on the tool's behavior rather than nonexistent parameters.

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 with a specific verb and resource: 'Remove the most recent pick'. It also provides a concrete use case ('for when someone mis-enters the board') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like record_pick (adding picks) and reset_draft (clearing the entire draft).

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool (when someone mis-enters a pick) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. It implies it is for error correction, which is helpful but lacks explicit exclusions or comparison to other tools.

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