highlight_manage

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals that mutations are a PUT of the bookmark's highlights array, that an entry with an _id edits it, and that empty text removes it. This provides important behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 concise at two sentences plus a clarifying line. It is front-loaded with the action and keeps details minimal without being terse. No unnecessary words.

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 tool's moderate complexity (6 params, 3 required, CRUD operations) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the main behaviors. It explains the underlying PUT mechanism and how operations work, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 83% (5 of 6 parameters have descriptions). The description adds some meaning: it explains the role of the operation parameter and reiterates that id is required for update/delete, but does not significantly deepen understanding beyond 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 tool's function: 'Creates, updates, or deletes highlights.' It uses specific verbs (creates, updates, deletes) and a specific resource (highlights), distinguishing it from sibling tools such as bookmark_manage or tag_manage.

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 explicitly instructs to use the operation parameter to specify the action, and provides context that highlights live on bookmarks. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternatives, but the guidance is clear and sufficient for selecting the tool.

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