add_tag_extends

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

Without annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the basic action, omitting details like idempotency, error handling (e.g., duplicate extensions, cycles), or side effects. The agent lacks crucial information for safe invocation.

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 with one sentence. While it is front-loaded, it lacks structure and is overly terse, missing opportunities to add value beyond the tool name.

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?

Given the absence of output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not address return values, error conditions, or implications for existing tag hierarchies, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

The schema coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the parameters. It mentions 'tag' and 'another tag' but does not clarify that 'tag_id' identifies the child and 'parent_tag_id_or_name' identifies the parent. The agent cannot map the description to the schema.

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 'Make a tag extend another tag' clearly states the action and resource, and the name 'add_tag_extends' reinforces this. It distinguishes well from siblings like 'remove_tag_extends' or 'add_tag_property', but does not elaborate on the exact nature of extension.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'add_tag_property' or 'create_tag'. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context on when extension is appropriate.

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