stellaris_kb_add_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the effect (searchable instantly, available offline), which is genuinely useful. However, it omits important mutation semantics: whether an existing title is overwritten, duplicated, or rejected, and whether there is any confirmation/return payload. Those gaps matter for a persistent local write.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the workflow trigger, then the observable outcome. No filler or repetition.

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 3-parameter write tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, workflow, and post-condition well enough to invoke it correctly. The remaining hole is idempotency/overwrite behavior on a repeated title.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds marginal value by tying the title parameter to the <X> in the URL template and reiterating that wikitext is the action=raw output. No detail is given on alias resolution behavior, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — "Store a wiki page into the local KB" — plus the accepted input format (raw wikitext). This is clearly distinguishable from read-oriented siblings like stellaris_get_page, stellaris_search, and stellaris_kb_stats.

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?

Gives a concrete trigger: call it right after fetching the action=raw URL via WebFetch, including the exact URL template. It lacks an explicit contrast with alternatives (e.g. stellaris_live_fetch or queue_add), but the when-to-use context is unambiguous.

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