add_entries

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states that entries are added after the current entry or at the end, but does not disclose authorization requirements, validation behavior, side effects on the session/current step, or reversibility 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and then usage context. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant or filler 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?

It gives enough to invoke the tool with session_id, entries, and position, and the nested entry schema is descriptive. However, for a mutation tool with no annotations or output schema, the description lacks the behavioral contract an agent would need to understand consequences and constraints.

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 67%, and the schema already documents session_id and the nested entry fields. The description adds useful meaning for position ('next' after the current entry vs 'end') and gives an example of entry situations, but does not compensate for the remaining gaps around scope, goal, or entry ordering.

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 gives a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('matrix entries') scoped to a session, with insertion position ('after the current entry' or 'at the end'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as submit_plan, but the operation is clear enough for selection.

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 explicitly says when to use the tool: 'Use when the work needs another entry, such as a Fix or Redesign the user authorized after a Review.' That is clear usage context, though it provides no when-not conditions or named alternatives.

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