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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations by stating the item is 're-resolved server-side before saving', which implies the item may be re-fetched and therefore may change between request and save. It also discloses the 'member:write' permission requirement. This is useful context beyond the idempotent hint and destructive hint in 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?

Three short, purposeful sentences. The permission is upfront, followed by exact action, then the key behavioral caveat. No passive filler or redundancy.

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 an output schema, so return format is covered by the schema. The description together with annotations explains permissions and mutation, but parameter semantic gaps (type/id interplay) remain. With 0% schema coverage, this is a clear gap that prevents the agent from fully understanding how 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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description gives no direct guidance for the 'type' and 'id' parameters. It only refers to 'guide item', leaving the agent to infer the role of the enum and string ID without any extra meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('save'), a resource ('public guide item'), and a target ('connected member account'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_guide_item (read) and remove_saved_guide_item (remove).

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 intended use—saving a public guide item for later—and requires member:write permission. It gives clear context but does not explicitly address when not to use it or name an alternative, though the sibling list makes the distinction easy.

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