apex_add_app_item

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

Annotations provide no safety hints (all false), so the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions the item is a global variable, but does not disclose side effects, permissions required, or behavior on conflicts. The 'create' action is expected, but operational details are absent.

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 a single, clear sentence that aptly summarizes the tool's purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.

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?

Given the schema fully describes parameters and output schema exists, the description is sufficiently complete for the core action. It clearly defines the item's scope, though it could enhance completeness by explicitly contrasting with related tools like apex_add_item.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all three parameters, including naming conventions and protection levels. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies per the rubric.

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 creates an application-level item, specifying the resource (application-level item) and its distinguishing trait (global variable available on all pages). This differentiates it from sibling tools like apex_add_item, which likely targets page-level items.

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 for global variables by stating 'available on all pages,' but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., apex_add_item) or provide when-not-to-use guidance. There is no explicit exclusion or alternative naming, so guidance is only implied.

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