pin

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but only says what the input can be. It does not disclose what pinning actually does to state, whether it is reversible, what happens on repeat pins, or how it interacts with the active window — all relevant for a mutation-style verb.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Brevity is appropriate, though the second sentence spends space repeating the schema rather than adding new meaning.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must define the operation's effect and context. It leaves 'active window', the purpose of the required 'reason' field, and the outcome of pinning entirely unexplained, so an agent cannot fully reason about invoking it correctly.

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 already documents 'name' as 'Node name or UUIDv7 id', so the description's second sentence is largely a restatement. More importantly, the required 'reason' parameter and the optional 'initiative' parameter are never explained in the description, leaving semantical gaps at 67% coverage.

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 ('pin') and resource ('a node to the active window'), which lets an agent distinguish it from the inverse sibling 'unpin'. It does not clarify what the 'active window' concept entails or how it differs from related siblings like 'slot' or 'settle'.

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 on when to use this rather than alternatives such as 'slot', 'settle', or 'attach'. The mirrored 'unpin' sibling implies a symmetry, but the description never states the condition that selects pinning.

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