add_existing_editor

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

The description adds the behavioral note that 'confirm=true' is required, which supplements the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). However, it does not disclose other traits like permission requirements or side effects of adding an editor.

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 concise with one sentence and a CLI reference. It avoids unnecessary details, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating parameter info).

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 low parameter coverage, the description is incomplete. It explains the tool's action but omits return value, parameter details for 'editor_path', and any post-conditions. More context is needed for full agent understanding.

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 has 0% description coverage, yet the tool description fails to explain the required 'editor_path' parameter. It only mentions the 'confirm' parameter's behavior. The description should compensate for the missing schema descriptions but does not.

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 tool's purpose: binding an editor installed outside the Hub, using the equivalent Hub-CLI command 'editors --add'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'install_editor' which install new editors.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'install_editor' or 'install_editor_via_deeplink'. The description only mentions the analogous CLI command, but does not provide usage context or exclusions.

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