Save an automation

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses key behavioral nuances: every match wakes the AI session, matching events start relaying immediately, and id is derived from name when omitted. It also clarifies the per-type meaning of min_amount. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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 yet dense, with each sentence providing essential information: the create/update operation, the policy, the doc format details, and the behavioral consequences. It is efficiently packed without wasted words.

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 tool with a single nested parameter and no output schema, the description covers the necessary context: how to construct the doc, what triggers are valid, how min_amount works, and what happens after saving. It also includes a usage policy. The only minor omission is not explicitly directing users to list_automations, but overall it is complete.

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?

Although the schema already describes the doc parameter, the description adds substantial meaning: canonical event names, per-type amount comparisons, id derivation, and the policy to only create streamer-requested automations. This clarifies the structure far beyond the schema's terse summary.

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 opens with 'Create or update an automation', clearly stating the verb and resource. It also explains the id matching behavior, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_automations and delete_automation. The purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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 gives explicit when-not guidance: 'Only create automations the streamer asked for.' It also advises 'Prefer rare, high-signal events' to limit AI session wakes. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as list_automations for finding existing automations, so it is not a 5.

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