hacs_add_custom_repository

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

No annotations present. Description omits behavioral details such as overwriting behavior, validation of URL/category, authentication requirements, or side effects. Only the action and parameters are mentioned.

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?

Single sentence of 12 words, no superfluous content. Front-loads action and parameters efficiently.

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?

No output schema provided despite context flag. Description does not explain return value, success indicators, or failure modes. For a tool that adds a resource, this is insufficient.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning by specifying that the URL is for a repository and listing allowed category values. This helps the agent know valid inputs beyond the raw string type.

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 ('Add') and the resource ('custom HACS repository') with explicit parameters (URL + category). It lists valid categories, distinguishing it from sibling tools like install, list, uninstall, etc.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'use install to actually install after adding'). The description implies a straightforward addition but lacks when-not-to-use context.

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