Agent Memory Bridge

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses critical behavioral constraints: only active leases extensible (not expired), hard expiry caps renewal, and ownership verification required ('Only the active claimant can extend'). It effectively communicates the distributed lease mechanics and failure modes (expiry precedence). Minor gap: doesn't mention atomicity or concurrency behavior.

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?

Four sentences with zero waste: sentence 1 states purpose, sentence 2 specifies when-to-use, sentence 3 states when-not-to-use with alternative, sentence 4 notes system constraint (hard expiry). Front-loaded with action verb. No redundant phrasing.

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?

Appropriate for a lease-management mutation tool with 3 simple parameters. Since output schema exists, description correctly omits return value details. Covers the essential domain concepts (lease vs expiry, ownership, reclaiming). With 100% param coverage and output schema, description provides sufficient operational context for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% (all 3 parameters fully documented). Description adds workflow context that reinforces parameter meanings: 'worker still owns a signal' maps to consumer identity requirement, 'needs more time' contextualizes lease_seconds, and 'one claimed signal' clarifies id refers to active claims. Elevates baseline 3 by connecting params to business logic.

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?

Description opens with specific verb 'Extend' + resource 'active lease' + scope 'one claimed signal'. It distinguishes from sibling 'claim_signal' by contrasting 'reclaimed' vs 'extended' and noting that expired leases must be reclaimed instead, clarifying the lease lifecycle workflow.

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?

Explicit 'Use this when' clause identifies the exact scenario (worker owns signal but needs more time). Clear exclusion 'Expired leases cannot be extended' with alternative action 'must be reclaimed'. Also notes precedence constraint that 'Hard signal expiry still takes precedence', preventing misuse.

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