Manage Interface List Member

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

The description discloses important behaviors: idempotency by composite key, return states for add (already_exists) and remove (not_found). This adds value beyond the annotations, which only indicate idempotency without detailing return behavior.

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 two tight sentences with crucial information front-loaded. No wasted words, and each sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool, the description covers purpose, behavior, and return states. Annotations cover safety, and no output schema is needed. The description is complete for correct agent 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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds only the note about the composite idempotency key. This does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema's own 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 'Add or remove an interface from an interface list,' specifying the exact verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like manage_interface_list, which manages the list object itself.

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 clearly implies the tool is for manipulating members of an interface list, and the context of sibling tools provides differentiation. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, nor are alternatives mentioned.

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