wattpad_backup_part

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: it is the only faithful copy, and it describes the return value (JSON with path and size), which goes beyond the annotations. No contradiction is present.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line action statement, a usage note, and a return type. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 only one parameter, clear annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), an output schema (implied), and a description that covers when to use it and what it returns, the tool is fully specified for an agent to call 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 provides a full description for part_id ('ID del capitulo a respaldar') with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add further parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the 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 states a specific verb (saves), resource (original HTML of a chapter), and action (to disk), clearly distinguishing it from editing tools like wattpad_update_part. It also explains its role as the only faithful copy, which further differentiates it from preview or retrieval tools.

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 provides an explicit trigger: 'Do this before any massive rewriting' (Haga esto antes de cualquier reescritura masiva), giving clear when-to-use context. It does not name alternative tools, but the guidance is sufficient for an agent to decide when this backup is necessary.

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