add-filters

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, confirming a mutation, and description adds context explaining filters are 'saved custom views using query syntax to organize tasks'. This goes beyond simple annotations, though it doesn't detail side effects like duplicate handling or permissions.

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 one sentence (16 words), front-loaded with the action, and no wasted words. It is concise and well-structured.

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?

The description conveys the tool's purpose and domain concept, and the schema fills in parameter details and query syntax. Given the presence of a detailed schema and output schema, this is adequately complete, though it could mention edge cases or prerequisites.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides; the schema is richly self-explanatory.

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 'Add one or more new personal filters' with a specific verb (add), resource (filters), and scope (personal). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update-filters and find-filters.

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 clearly implies use for creating new filters, and the context is unambiguous about the operation type. However, it does not explicitly reference alternatives (e.g., update-filters for existing filters), so it does not fully meet the 'explicit when/when-not' bar.

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