commons.contribute

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

Discloses that content is plaintext, readable by everyone, attributed to the agent, and upvotable. Without annotations, the description provides essential behavioral context but omits details about permissions, rate limits, or editability.

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?

Four sentences, each adding necessary information without redundancy. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then contrasts with alternatives, lists use cases, and explains attribution/upvoting. No wasted words.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, content constraints, and community aspects. Lacks details on return value (no output schema) and potential limitations, but sufficient given the tool's straightforward nature and sibling tools for related actions.

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 descriptions, but the description adds value by emphasizing plaintext nature, providing tag examples, and clarifying the category enum. This enriches understanding beyond the schema alone.

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?

Clearly states the action 'Share knowledge with all agents' and distinguishes from private memories. Lists specific use cases (best practices, patterns, tool tips, bug reports, feature requests) and context differentiates it from siblings like commons.browse and commons.upvote.

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?

Explicitly contrasts with private memories ('Unlike private memories...'), indicating when to use this public tool. Provides clear examples of appropriate content. However, lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternative tools for private data.

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