bowire.allowlist.permit

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the persistence side effect (appends to ~/.bowire/typed-urls.json), the session-scoped in-memory allowlist mutation, and the return payload (whether the URL was new plus list size). These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs beyond the bare schema.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and its persistence target, with the parenthetical clarifying the file's origin. Every clause carries information (side effects, session scope, return values) with no filler.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, its persistence and in-memory effects, the intended usage moment, and even the return values. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and the single url parameter is documented as "Server URL to allow," so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying the URL is what gets allowlisted for bowire.invoke / bowire.subscribe and is written to the typed-urls file, giving the parameter concrete effect beyond the schema text.

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 states a specific verb+resource: recording that a URL is now allowed for bowire.invoke / bowire.subscribe, with the concrete effect of appending to a named file. An agent can distinguish this write operation from the read-only sibling bowire.allowlist.show without opening either schema.

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?

It gives a clear when-to-use context ("Use to surface 'the user just typed this URL into the workbench'") and contrasts it with the alternative of re-reading the file. It does not explicitly name bowire.allowlist.show as the read counterpart or state when-not to use it, so it falls just short of 5.

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