add_children_to_case

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only says 'mutation' and gives an example. It does not mention whether the operation is additive/idempotent, what permissions are required, what side effects occur, or what the response contains. The mutation status is already evident from the operation name.

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 very brief and front-loaded with the operation domain and mutation name. The example is compact and useful, though the 'Variables: input' line adds little beyond the schema.

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 mutation with no annotations, output schema, or nested schema details, the description is incomplete. It gives an example payload but omits semantics, constraints, return values, and error/edge-case behavior, so an agent would likely need to make assumptions before invoking it.

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 schema provides only a GraphQL type reference for input, so the example variables add essential structure: input.caseId, input.children.childId, and input.children.childType. This compensates for the opaque schema, though only one childType example (DISCOVER_TASK) is shown and customer_slug is not addressed in the description.

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 identifies the operation as 'mutation addChildrenToCase' and provides an example payload with caseId and childType DISCOVER_TASK, making the core action of adding child objects to a case discernible. It lacks a plain-language explanation of 'children' and does not explicitly contrast with related case mutations, but the verb+resource mapping is reasonably clear.

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 provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as remove_child_from_case or add_case_comment. The description only labels the operation and shows an example; there are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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