propose_snippets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool searches and returns exactly 3 options with URLs, and instructs to call integrate_post. However, it does not mention what happens if fewer than 3 results are found or any edge cases, which is a minor gap.

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 somewhat long but well-structured with a clear flow: what it does, when to use it, and steps after invocation. All sentences are purposeful, though minor trimming could improve conciseness.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description effectively covers the tool's purpose, use case, and subsequent steps. It distinguishes from siblings. However, it lacks details on error handling or empty results, which would enhance completeness.

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% with clear descriptions for all 3 parameters. The description adds context about the overall workflow but does not provide additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Search Looba and propose exactly 3 snippet options' and specifies the resource ('snippet options with looba.dev URLs'). It distinguishes from the sibling 'list_posts' by explicitly saying to use this tool instead when users ask for UI components or visual elements.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('Use this tool INSTEAD of list_posts whenever the user asks for a UI component...') and gives a step-by-step post-invocation workflow (present options, ask which one, call integrate_post). This effectively prevents misuse and guides the AI agent.

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