Manage Component Storage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It describes what actions do (list, get, set, delete) but does not disclose side effects, persistence, size limits, or error behaviors. Basic transparency but lacking depth for a mutation tool.

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 long, front-loading the purpose and actions. Every sentence is informative with no redundancy or unnecessary words.

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 has 4 parameters with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description explains actions and preconditions (target COMP must exist). However, it does not describe return values (e.g., what list/get return) or error conditions, which would improve completeness.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining each action's effect (e.g., 'list returns all keys+values') and noting that value must be JSON-serializable. This supplements the schema's enum descriptions and key requirements.

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 it performs CRUD operations on a COMP operator's .storage dictionary, listing all four actions (list, get, set, delete). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings like manage_component by noting it does not create operators and the target must already exist.

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 tells when to use the tool (on an existing COMP's storage) and explicitly says 'no operators are created' and 'the target COMP must already exist,' guiding appropriate use. It does not explicitly state when not to use alternatives, but the context is clear.

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