Link external submodel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral trait: the service validates paths against RELATIVE_EXTERNAL_ROOTS and refuses anything outside it. This adds meaningful context beyond the basic action, though it does not mention side effects, permissions, or return details.

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 tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a key constraint. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.

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 tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose and a critical restriction but is incomplete in some areas. It does not mention return values, failure behavior beyond path refusal, or any required permissions, leaving an agent to infer these from context.

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 50%, so the description must partially compensate. The description clarifies 'ref' by explaining it points to an external model directory and is subject to an allowlist, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, 'name' and 'description' remain undocumented, and the description does not systematically address all parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Add') and identifies the resource ('submodel node') with a clear qualifier ('backed by a model directory outside this one'). This distinguishes it from siblings like enter_submodel or create_model, which involve different operations.

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 context for when to use the tool (when linking an external model directory as a submodel). It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to differentiate it from related tools.

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