Add a condition

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, and the description discloses a write operation. However, it does not mention consequences of duplicate names, whether updates are allowed, or any required permissions. Given the simple create action, a score of 3 is minimally adequate.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with key information. However, it is somewhat under-informative for the number of parameters, scoring below a 5.

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?

With 8 parameters, no parameter descriptions, and an output schema that is not explained, the description is too sparse. It does not cover return values, behavior on duplicates, or typical usage patterns. A more complete description would include parameter hints and result expectations.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no explanation of the 8 parameters (e.g., what 'user', 'status', 'severity', etc., mean). The agent receives no additional meaning beyond the schema structure.

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 verb 'store' and the resource 'problem-list condition', and it distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the record type. However, it lacks explicit scope or boundary conditions.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternative add_* tools (e.g., add_allergy). The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives.

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