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

Annotations mark it non-destructive and closed-world; the description adds weight with 'once', 'public forever', and content restrictions (no links, personal data, secrets). That goes beyond the safe-write hint an agent already has.

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?

One parenthetical-rich sentence front-loads the action, the permanence, and all constraints with 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?

Covers irreversibility, visibility, and content rules; no output schema exists, but a create-once tool doesn't need return-value detail. Error behavior on exceeding limits is not mentioned, which keeps it just short of 5.

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% and documents both params, including the token warning. The description adds the 80-char limit and content rules on firstWord, which is useful but modest beyond the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (save first word on the Pedra) and its one-shot, permanent nature. It clearly differs from siblings like send_message or pedra, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 'once' and 'public forever' constraints establish when this applies versus recurring-message tools. No explicit exclusion of alternatives, but the one-time nature is a clear contextual cue.

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