redis_incr

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the blocking behavior tied to readOnly mode, but fails to mention what happens if the key does not exist (initialization to 1) or if the value is not an integer, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides a critical behavioral constraint. Every word earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description omits return value specifics and error scenarios (e.g., key type mismatch). While adequate for basic use, the agent may lack full context for handling unexpected states.

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 description coverage is 50% (only connectionId has a description). The description adds minimal context for 'key' by stating it is the key to increment. For 'connectionId,' it relies on the schema. Overall, the description adds some meaning but does not fully compensate for the low coverage.

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 'Increment the integer value of a key' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like redis_get, redis_set, etc. The additional condition about readOnly mode further clarifies its scope.

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 description explicitly notes that the tool is 'Blocked when that connection's own readOnly mode is enabled,' providing a clear condition for when it should not be used. It does not explicitly name alternatives but implies usage for increment operations.

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