add_redirect_uri

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and adds meaningful behavioral context: it discloses role requirements (Member vs Admin), environment-specific URI validation rules, and the confirmation requirement for LIVE mode. It does not detail failure modes or duplicate handling, but it covers the key operational constraints.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose followed by two clearly separated mode-specific rules. Every sentence provides necessary information with no redundancy or filler.

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 mutation tool with five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essential call constraints: environment differences, permission levels, URL policies, and confirmation. Minor gaps like duplicate handling or post-add behavior are less critical for correct invocation.

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%, but the description enriches parameter meaning by tying uri and environment semantics together: TEST allows localhost, LIVE does not, and confirmation is conditionally required. This goes beyond the raw schema definitions and helps the agent construct valid calls.

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 action, resource, and purpose: 'Add a redirect URI to an AgeKey application.' It clearly differentiates from the sibling tool remove_redirect_uri by name and operation, so an agent can immediately know what the tool does.

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 provides clear mode-specific guidance: TEST mode allows any valid URL and requires Member role; LIVE mode requires HTTPS, no localhost, Admin role, and confirmation. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the operation is self-contained and the sibling remove_redirect_uri implies the inverse case.

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