add_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Log' implies a create/write action, but the description does not disclose persistence behavior, duplicate handling, permissions, or other side effects; it mainly provides field-value guidance.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a compact field guide. Every line adds useful value and there is no wasted prose.

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 an 8-parameter write tool with no annotations, the description does a good job explaining ambiguous parameters and the output schema covers return values. It remains incomplete on mutation behavior and sibling selection guidance, which an agent would need to invoke it confidently in 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for the ambiguous fields: category values, seasons formats, styles values, wearability scale meaning, and last_worn date format. It does not explain name, color, or notes, but those are largely self-evident.

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 action and resource: logging one owned clothing item. It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like record_wear or list_items, though it does not explicitly name those adjacent 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?

Usage is implied as adding a clothing item to the inventory, and the field guidance helps with filling the item out. However, it does not say when to use this versus record_wear, list_items, or other siblings, nor does it state exclusions.

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