preference.hear

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds context about two modes, but lacks details on side effects, return values, or error handling, especially given no output schema.

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 extremely concise with two sentences covering both modes. It is front-loaded and every word adds value. No wasted text.

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 tool with 6 parameters and two modes, the description covers the core functionality but is incomplete. It does not explain return values (no output schema), error conditions, or detailed behavior when both feedback and profile_id are omitted.

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 documentation covers all 6 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter-specific information, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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's dual purpose: presenting samples without feedback and updating the preference profile with feedback. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'preference.get' and 'preference.reset' by focusing on interactive sessions.

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?

It implicitly tells when to use each mode (present samples vs. update profile), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., 'preference.get' for retrieving the profile).

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