Document a subsystem

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

Discloses that it writes a file and refreshes an index, implying side effects. However, with no annotations, the description could be more transparent about overwriting existing files, error cases, or required permissions. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 redundant information. It front-loads the primary action and immediately follows with usage guidance. 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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main use case and explains what the tool accomplishes (writing a file and updating an index). It leaves some gaps regarding error handling and exact behavior on existing files, but is largely sufficient.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context for the content parameter (what to include) but does not substantially enhance meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 verb (write or update) and resource (markdown knowledge-base doc for a subsystem), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_doc (reading) and list_subsystems (listing).

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?

Explicitly states when to use: to record function descriptions, tuning values, config names, and quirks. Provides context for documentation, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives like get_doc for reading.

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