dawarich_add_points

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Add raw Dawarich points' without mentioning side effects, idempotency, permission requirements, or the behavior of the dry_run parameter. This is a significant gap 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 exceptionally concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and the second sentence adds valuable usage guidance. There is zero redundancy or fluff.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool's mutation nature and sparse input schema demand more context. The description fails to clarify the expected format of 'points', the function of 'dry_run', or any constraints/limits. It is inadequate for reliable invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not compensate by explaining the 'points' array structure, the meaning of 'raw', or the purpose of 'dry_run'. The agent must guess parameter semantics entirely.

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 action ('Add raw Dawarich points') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'raw' points and explicitly naming alternatives (visit/timeline tools), making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Prefer visit/timeline tools unless raw samples are needed.' This directly tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives, satisfying the usage guideline requirement.

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