apex_add_progress_tracker

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description is consistent with a mutating but non-destructive operation. The description adds the visual detail of 'horizontal steps with active state' but does not disclose side effects like region creation or page requirements.

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, tight sentence that immediately states the action and object, with a brief parenthetical clarifying the component style. There is no filler or repetition.

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 component-add tool with 8 parameters and a full output schema, the description is adequate: it names the action and the component type. However, it does not explain the intended use case (e.g., multi-step wizard flows) or note that steps must be provided as an array, though the schema covers this. Overall, it is minimally complete but not rich.

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?

All 8 parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema's existing descriptions, such as 'List of step labels' and 'Active step number (1-based)'. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Add' with a specific resource 'step progress tracker' and clarifies the visual form ('horizontal steps with active state'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like add_region or add_item.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied by the component name and the brief parenthetical, but there are no exclusions or alternative tools mentioned.

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