Save a team

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that teams are stored as plain text in teams/, which is useful. However, it does not specify whether saving over an existing name overwrites or errors, nor does it mention any validation or response behavior. This is a partial disclosure.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence. It communicates the action, object, key parameter roles, and storage detail with zero redundancy, making it both concise and well-structured.

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?

Although the tool is simple, it is a mutation with no annotations or output schema. The description omits critical behavior like whether an existing team with the same name is overwritten, and it does not explain what the tool returns (if anything). These gaps are significant for an agent to invoke it safely, so the description is incomplete.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description effectively maps both parameters: 'name' is the label to save under, and 'team_paste' is the Showdown-export paste. It adds the important format context ('Showdown-export') and storage location, going beyond raw schema property names.

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 action ('Save'), the object ('Showdown-export team paste'), and the context ('under a name', stored in teams/). It is distinct from sibling tools like analyze_team or list_teams, which focus on analysis or listing, making this the only save operation.

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 intended use is clear: save a team for later retrieval. While no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, the sibling tool names make it obvious that this tool is for persisting teams, not analyzing or listing them. This provides clear context without requiring explicit when-not guidance.

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