affinity_add_sdk_hint

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

Annotations already declare non-readOnly, non-idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the hint is persisted into a preamble and affects future sessions, which signals global scope. However, it omits that non-idempotency means repeated calls create duplicate hints, and says nothing about where or how the hint is stored or whether it requires validation.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action front-loaded and no padding. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the reason key usage and parameter details are missing.

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 persistent-state mutation tool with no output schema and zero schema description coverage, the description should explain verification requirements, duplicate handling, and the relationship to affinity_search_sdk_hints. None of that is present.

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 0% for the single required 'hint' parameter, so the description must carry the semantics. It only adds the qualifier 'verified' and never states expected format, syntax, scope, or length constraints beyond the schema's minLength of 1.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Add a verified SDK hint') and clarifies the destination ('Affinity's preamble for future sessions'). It does not distinguish this write path from the obvious sibling read path (affinity_search_sdk_hints), so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says to search existing hints first via affinity_search_sdk_hints, nothing defines what 'verified' means, and nothing excludes low-confidence hints. The agent must infer the entire workflow from the name alone.

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