save-paper

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a write operation ('save') but does not explain idempotency, duplicate handling, return values, or side effects beyond persistence. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and key resource, with no unnecessary words or redundancy. It is appropriately concise and well-structured.

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 output schema and annotations, the description should explain more about the tool's behavior, such as whether it returns a confirmation or handles duplicate saves. The simple action is stated, but the absence of return value or error behavior makes it incomplete for an agent to fully anticipate the tool's response.

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 already provides complete descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states.

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 ('Save'), the object ('a paper'), and the destination ('your persistent research session'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like add-note or clear-session by specifying the paper-saving purpose.

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 phrase 'for later reading or reference' implies the intended use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. Usage is inferred rather than stated directly.

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