Gildara

Agent readability score

Strengths

• Tool names clearly indicate their primary function (e.g., 'resolve_prompt', 'save_brief')
• Descriptions explain use cases for most tools (e.g., 'use when the user wants to send work to a specific agent')
• OAuth integration details are explicitly mentioned where applicable

Weaknesses

• Multiple descriptions are cut off (e.g., 'search_prompts' ends abruptly with 'Use thi')
• Parameter requirements and types are not specified in any tool's description
• Ambiguous tool overlap between 'list_returned_briefs' and 'get_brief_result'

• search_prompts — Description is incomplete and cuts off mid-sentence
• save_brief — Description is cut off mid-sentence
• list_blueprints — No mention of required parameters or authentication requirements
• draft_prompt — Vague description lacks specific use case examples

Verdict

The toolset demonstrates good intent with clear naming conventions, but critical documentation gaps in parameter specifications and incomplete descriptions significantly impact usability. The 60/100 readability score aligns with these documentation shortcomings.

9/11/2026, 6:21:32 AM

Event narrative