alterios_ensure_project_icons

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It ambiguously says 'Plan or upload' without explaining that dry_run controls whether actual upload occurs, or any side effects like project modification.

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 a single concise sentence, but it combines two different actions (plan vs upload) which could be split for clarity. Still, it is efficient.

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 complex tool with 7 parameters and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not cover parameter usage, behavior variation with dry_run, or what the output schema contains.

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% with 7 parameters, yet the description only mentions 'Google Fonts Icons' and 'project'. It fails to explain key parameters like dry_run, icon_specs, project_id, etc.

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 'Plan or upload Google Fonts Icons into one Alterios project and return UUID iconId values,' providing a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_project_icons or resolve_project_icon.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_project_icons, resolve_project_icon). No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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