Save app data

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: 'The data is sent as the request body' and the accepted payload types. Annotations already signal a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), so the description doesn't need to restate that. However, it does not disclose important behaviors such as whether existing data under the same id is overwritten, or any authentication/rate-limit considerations, leaving gaps that annotations do not fill.

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 appropriately concise, consisting of two short sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose ('Save web-app data under a data id') and then provide the necessary payload format details. Every sentence adds value, with no 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?

For a simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic purpose and payload types. However, it lacks information about behavior such as overwrite semantics, return values, or error conditions, which would be especially important since no output schema exists and annotations do not provide destructive hints. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 the baseline is 3. The schema already describes both parameters: 'data_id' as a key and 'data' as the payload. The description adds minimal extra value, mainly clarifying that the data is sent as the request body, which is not explicitly in the schema but is a minor transport detail. No significant additional semantic meaning is provided beyond the schema.

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+resource: 'Save web-app data under a data id.' This clearly communicates the action and distinguishes it from retrieval (get) and deletion (delete) tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'banana_appdata_form', relying on the tool name and implied semantics rather than an explicit comparison.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'banana_appdata_get' or 'banana_appdata_delete'. The description only explains how to format the data ('Provide a JSON object/array... or a raw string'), not when to choose this tool. This is effectively no usage guidance, as the 'save' purpose is implied but not contrasted with siblings.

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