apex_add_button

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

The description only repeats the action 'Add' without disclosing side effects, idempotency, failure modes, or whether the change is immediately persisted. Annotations are all false (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), offering little safety context, so the description carries the burden but does not add behavioral detail beyond the verb.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and target. Every word earns its place, and the parenthetical adds useful context without redundancy.

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 rich input schema and presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values or parameter details. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., persistence, error handling, prerequisites) and usage exclusions, leaving the description functional but not fully complete for an agent operating in a complex APEX environment.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 12 parameters. The description's parenthetical list (CREATE, SAVE, DELETE, CANCEL) partially overlaps with the button_name examples in the schema, adding no new semantics. Thus a baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('button to a region'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like apex_add_item or apex_add_region. The parenthetical list (CREATE, SAVE, DELETE, CANCEL, or custom) further clarifies the domain and is unique to buttons.

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 when a button is needed in a region, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. There is no mention of related tools like apex_add_dynamic_action for dynamic-action-based buttons or apex_delete_button for removal, though the context makes the basic intent clear.

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