apply_queue_add

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

The description discloses an important behavioral trait: 'If an item with the same job_id already exists it is replaced.' This goes beyond basic purpose, informing the agent of upsert behavior. However, without annotations, it doesn't cover side effects like required permissions or concurrency issues. Still, it adds significant value.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second clarifies the key behavioral nuance. Every sentence is essential with no redundant wording.

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's complexity (nested object parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but not comprehensive. It does not mention error conditions, expected file state, or synchronization semantics. For a mutation tool, a bit more context on safety or validation would improve completeness.

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%, with each parameter having a description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond the schema's own descriptions. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the description does not compensate for any gaps.

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 the specific action: 'Add or replace a QueueItem in the batch-apply queue.' The verb 'add' with resource 'QueueItem' and context 'batch-apply queue' uniquely identifies the tool's purpose, distinguishing it from sibling tools like apply_queue_approve or apply_act.

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 explains what the tool does but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., queue file existence) or when to avoid using it. Implicitly, it's for adding/replacing items, but lacks direct comparison with siblings.

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