Reflect: Add Segment

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and destructiveHint=false. The description mentions 'active' session, implying a constraint, but does not disclose behaviors like what happens if session not found, required permissions, or side effects beyond insertion. The added value beyond annotations is minimal.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action. However, it unnecessarily repeats the parameter list from the schema, creating redundancy. The 'Toolset' line adds minor context but could be integrated. Overall acceptable but not highly 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?

For a simple write tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic action. However, it lacks details on expected outcomes (e.g., success indicator, return value) and prerequisites (e.g., session must exist and be active). It is minimally complete but leaves gaps for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters well-described in the schema. The description repeats the parameter names and types from the schema without adding new meaning or context (e.g., how to obtain a segmentId or sessionId). Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 inserts a reusable test segment into an active Reflect recording session. The verb 'Insert' and resource 'segment' are specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like reflect_add_prompt_step, though the name implies focus on segments.

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 implies usage when adding a segment to a session but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., reflect_add_prompt_step) or conditions like prerequisite session existence. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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