add_to_suite

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on the burden of explaining side effects. It clearly states that a new placement is created and that repeated calls do not move or merge, and it explains how dataset fields are used. It does not cover errors or permissions, but the primary behavior is transparent.

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 overly long, run-on, and packed with nested parentheticals, making it harder to parse than necessary. Key points like 'new placement' and dataset fallback are repeated or buried in complex clauses.

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 lack of an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, how duplicate calls behave, and how the dataset-related parameters function. The main remaining gap is a clearer explanation of what a 'saved run' means in practice, but overall the tool is reasonably complete.

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 description adds meaningful detail beyond the sparse schema coverage, especially for datasetTokens, useYaml, yaml, and path. It clarifies that scenarioId refers to an existing scenario and that project falls back to an environment variable, though project is only explained in the schema.

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 action as placing an existing scenario at a suite folder path, and it distinguishes this from a bare reference and from moving/merging. The phrase 'SAVED RUN, not a bare reference' is somewhat ambiguous, but the core purpose is identifiable.

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 provides useful guidance on duplicate behavior and the default dataset fallback when omit all three dataset-related fields. However, it does not explicitly explain when to prefer this tool over sibling tools like move_suite_entry or remove_from_suite, and the mention of add_flow_to_scenario could confuse selection.

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