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

The annotations only include idempotentHint=false, which is minimally informative. The description goes beyond this by disclosing the template is a copy at creation time, independent from the Riddle's later changes, includes unpublished content, and returns a template object. It also mentions the permission requirement. This adds substantial behavioral context beyond 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 a single paragraph, efficiently packed with essential information. It is slightly dense but every sentence adds value: the main action, the copy semantics, what is copied, the return value, and permission. It could be split into bullets for readability, but it is not wordy.

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?

The tool has a moderate complexity (3 params, no output schema), but the description covers all key aspects: the action, the snapshot nature, including unpublished content, the return shape, and the permission requirement. It does not explicitly state whether the operation is reversible or if it can be undone, but the return value and permission are enough for typical usage.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by explaining that the template is a snapshot, which clarifies the meaning of the title parameter (can override the Riddle's title) and isQuickCreate (affects visibility in quick create). It also clarifies the UUID parameter by giving an example, though the schema already has descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: storing an existing Riddle as a template for later reuse. It names the exact resource (Riddle), the action (stores), and the context (project or personal), and it explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool riddleTemplate_use, which is the reciprocal operation.

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 implies when to use it (when you want to create a template from an existing Riddle) and mentions the required permission, which is useful context. It does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or list alternatives, like riddleTemplate_use for creation, but the sibling context makes it clear.

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