OpenPanel: Increment property

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful constraints (profile must pre-exist, property must be numeric), but it omits what happens on failure, whether a missing property is created, and that the increment amount is caller-controlled.

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?

Two short sentences with the critical precondition front-loaded. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds no meaning, but otherwise there is no wasted wording.

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?

This is a non-idempotent mutation with 4 undocumented parameters and no output schema. The description covers the pre-existence precondition but leaves the increment amount, the site scoping, and the error/return behavior entirely unaddressed.

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 0% across 4 parameters, so the description carries the full burden. It constrains profile_id (must exist) and property_name (must be numeric), but never mentions site or the value parameter that sets the increment amount and defaults to 1 — a meaningful gap an agent could get wrong.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: increment a numeric property on a user profile. The verb itself distinguishes it from the sibling openpanel_decrement_property, though the description never names that alternative explicitly.

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?

Gives a clear precondition and routes the agent to a named tool: the profile must exist first, use identify_user. It does not state when not to use it or when decrement_property would be the better choice, but the core usage context is explicit.

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