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

Adds meaningful context beyond the annotations: appends exactly one entry to the page's thread, keeps it for 24 hours, and changes nothing else. This is a good disclosure for a mutation with destructiveHint=false, though it does not describe repeated-call behavior despite idempotentHint=false.

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?

Two tight sentences with the action and scope front-loaded, followed by the prerequisite and side effects. Every sentence carries distinct information.

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 purpose, prerequisite, retention, and side effects, which is strong for a five-parameter mutation with no output schema. It leaves minor gaps around repeated invocations and the audience parameter, but an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 80%, so the schema already documents the answer, session, sources, and question parameters. The description clarifies the answer-or-search shape but does not add meaning for the undocumented audience parameter or deeper source structure, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: adding a question/answer or search/passages exchange to the connected HenryKnows page thread. It is clearly distinct from ask_henry, connect, and search_sources, which respectively produce answers, establish sessions, and search sources.

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?

Explicitly restricts usage to 'people who connected a page,' which links the tool to the connect sibling as a prerequisite. It implies this is a follow-up step after an exchange, though it does not explicitly contrast with ask_henry or say when not to share.

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