Add pinned file

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds minimal context (the 'for a host' scope) but does not disclose behavior such as duplicate handling, idempotency, or side effects beyond adding. Given annotation coverage, this is adequate but not rich.

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 short and to the point, but the first sentence ('Add pinned file') redundantly restates the title, and the second sentence adds only the host context. It neither wastes words nor provides substantial information, so it is acceptable but not exemplary.

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?

For a simple mutating operation with annotations covering safety, the description is still incomplete: it lacks parameter explanations, error conditions, and any note on file existence or duplicate pinning. An agent cannot fully determine correct usage without additional context.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for name, path, and hostId. The description does not explain what these parameters represent or their relationships, leaving the agent to infer their meaning. It does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 clear verb 'add' and a specific resource ('pinned files for a host'), which distinguishes it from similar operations like 'get_pinned_files' or 'add_recent_file'. However, it does not explicitly contrast with those siblings, leaving some differentiation to inference.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_recent_file' or 'add_shortcut'. The description merely restates the action without indicating preconditions, scenarios, or exclusions, offering no decision support.

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