add_artist

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the handle validation requirement and error clarity, but omits other behavioral traits such as duplicate handling, permissions needed, or side effects. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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: two sentences, no redundant words, and all information is relevant. The key constraint is front-loaded in the second sentence.

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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a critical constraint. It does not explain return values (covered by output schema) or behavior for duplicate entries, but remains mostly complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 0% for the single parameter 'handle', and the description only adds that it is an 'Instagram handle' without specifying format (e.g., with/without @). This provides minimal additional meaning beyond the schema's title 'Handle'.

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 action ('Track a new artist') and the resource ('by Instagram handle'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'remove_artist' or 'list_artists', 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 a clear prerequisite: the handle must resolve to a professional (Business/Creator) account, and explicitly states the error behavior for invalid handles. It implicitly guides when to use (when adding a new artist after verifying the handle), but does not mention when not to use or suggest alternatives.

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