heart_requestAdd the signed-in customer's heart to a feature request (or remove it with on:false). Hearts count COMPANIES and each person has a monthly budget — a heart spends something real. Requires authorization.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The thread id | |
| on | No | false to remove the heart; default true |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds important context beyond annotations: it is scoped to the signed-in customer, hearts count companies, there is a monthly budget, and authorization is required. These details reveal real costs and constraints that annotations alone do not capture. No contradiction with annotations.
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 three concise sentences, with the primary action and toggle behavior front-loaded. Every sentence provides useful information: action/removal, company/budget implications, and authorization.
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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is affected, how to toggle removal, the resource cost, and authorization. No critical detail is missing.
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%, with id and on already documented in the input schema. The description reinforces the on:false removal behavior but does not add new parameter constraints or format details beyond the schema.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Add the signed-in customer's heart to a feature request' and clearly includes the removal behavior via on:false. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like comment_on_request and post_feature_request.
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 clearly conveys when to use it: to heart or unheart a feature request, and notes the meaningful budget consequence. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the action and resource are clear enough to guide selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target distinct actions, but get_product_overview, search_knowledge_base, and server_info all overlap on product-capability questions, and search_forum overlaps with get_roadmap for status discovery. The descriptions help direct usage, but ambiguity remains in a few pairs.
Nearly all tools follow a clean snake_case verb_noun pattern: get_pricing, heart_request, post_feature_request, search_forum. Minor deviations like server_info and my_requests are noun-phrase names, but they do not disrupt the overall readability.
Thirteen tools is well within the ideal range, and each tool earns its place. The set covers product info, pricing, forum engagement, knowledge base, waitlist, and contact without feeling padded.
The toolset covers the full customer-facing lifecycle: discover the product, check pricing, search and read forum threads, post requests, comment, heart, track personal requests, join the waitlist, and contact a human. There are no obvious dead ends for the stated purpose.