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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, covering the key behavioral traits. The description adds context about the purpose of the saved list but does not disclose additional behaviors like reversibility or side effects beyond what annotations already convey.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It states the action and purpose efficiently, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 write operation with two parameters (one optional) and no output schema, the description provides enough context about the tool's purpose. Combined with annotations covering idempotency and non-destructiveness, the agent can reasonably infer when and how to call it, though it doesn't explain the confirm parameter's usage (covered in schema).

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 only 50% (confirm has a description, creator_id does not). The tool description does not compensate by explaining either parameter, particularly the required creator_id. This leaves a gap in understanding what creator_id refers to and when confirm is needed.

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 action ('Add a creator to your saved list') and provides context about what the saved list is used for ('the shortlist campaigns draw from'). It is specific and distinguishes this from unsave_creator, even though it doesn't name it explicitly.

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 the tool is used to save a creator for campaigns, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives like unsave_creator or when not to use it. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions, leaving some inference to the agent.

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