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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the description's job is lighter. It adds real value by spelling out the consequence of non-idempotency ('Each call adds another row' — duplicates accumulate) and naming the endpoint, though it omits duplicate-key error behavior and permission requirements.

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?

Four short lines with the WRITE marker front-loaded, the key semantic constraint second, the duplication warning third, and the endpoint last. No sentence is redundant.

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?

A mutation tool with no output schema and full schema coverage; the description covers purpose, key/value semantics, and the column-order prerequisite. It stops short of stating what the call returns or how an existing key_column is handled, which are the remaining gaps.

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%, so 3 is the baseline. The description earns a bump by cross-referencing goformz_get_datasource as the source of column order and restating key_column's role as the lookup key, adding workflow meaning beyond the field-level text.

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 ('WRITE: add a row to a data source') and reinforces scope with 'Each call adds another row', which separates it from the update/get/list row siblings. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear usage context by directing the agent to goformz_get_datasource for column order before supplying values. It does not explicitly say when to use this instead of goformz_update_datasource_row, so the exclusion is left to inference.

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