mimir_share

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

The description states the original entity is unchanged, but the destructiveHint annotation is true. The description does not clarify if the tool can overwrite an existing entity in the target workspace or if it always creates a new one. Additionally, it does not mention permission requirements or other side effects, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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, each serving a clear purpose: stating the action, detailing the effect, and providing usage guidance. No extraneous words, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 (3 required params, no enums, output schema present), the description covers the core behavior well. However, it lacks details on source workspace determination, error handling for non-existent entities, and potential overwrite behavior. The presence of an output schema likely covers return values, so the description is nearly complete.

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 input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds context that the source workspace is implied (not a parameter), which is a minor addition. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides adequate information.

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 copies an entity from its current workspace to another workspace, preserving content and metadata while generating a new ID. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like mimir_migrate or mimir_ingest by specifying the copy action and cross-workspace transfer.

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 says 'Use this for controlled cross-workspace knowledge transfer,' providing clear guidance on when to use the tool. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for the primary use case.

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