triage_promote

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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden. It clearly says 'Move,' implying a state change, and adds useful conditional behavior such as acceptance being required for size='large' and linked_frs being needed for pull-eligibility. It does not mention reversibility or what happens to the original triage state, but it does disclose the main non-obvious constraints.

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 compact and well-structured: one front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a concise bullet list of parameters. Every line earns its place and there is no filler.

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?

For a six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers the operation, all arguments, defaults, and conditional requirements, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. It is slightly incomplete only in that it does not clarify how the move affects the source triage state or how this tool relates to nearby milestone/triage siblings.

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 0%, and the description compensates fully by explaining all six parameters: bug_id with an example, to_milestone as a slug, size valid values and default, acceptance's conditional requirement, priority semantics, and linked_frs' conditional role. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema titles.

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 first sentence, 'Move a triage item to a target milestone,' uses a specific verb and resource, making the core action clear. It is not explicitly differentiated from siblings like milestone_move_item or milestone_add_item, but the meaning is unambiguous enough for an agent.

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 given about when to prefer triage_promote over conceptually similar siblings such as triage_dismiss, milestone_move_item, or milestone_add_item. The description focuses on how the operation works, not when it should be chosen.

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