Add Playbook Step

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

Given no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that steps support {{placeholder}} syntax and are ordered, but it does not mention side effects (e.g., immediate creation, error behaviors, or interactions with playbook runs). Moderate transparency but lacks detail about post-creation effects.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. It is concise and avoids redundancy, providing necessary information without clutter.

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 tool with 13 parameters (4 required) and no output schema or annotations, the description covers high-level concepts (types, ordering, placeholders) but misses details like error handling, the deprecated assignee parameter, and state prerequisites. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 100%, providing solid baseline (score 3). The description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying ordering semantics ('append by using a value higher than existing steps') and the distinction between step types. This extra context moves the score to 4.

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: 'Add an ordered step to a playbook.' It distinguishes between two types (native_task and external_action) and mentions ordering by order_index. This differentiates it from sibling tools like update_playbook_step and remove_playbook_step.

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 explains when to use each step type (native_task for tasks created in Founders OS, external_action for AI-instruction steps) and how ordering works. It does not explicitly state prerequisites (e.g., playbook must exist) or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for typical use.

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