save_board

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It reveals the key behavior (persistence to disk) and a dependency (other tools read the file). However, it lacks details on synchronous/asynchronous nature, error conditions, or whether it overwrites without confirmation. For a simple save operation, this is adequate but minimal.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and includes a critical dependency. Every word is necessary, and there is no fluff. Highly efficient.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and a key use case. It explains why saving is needed for other tools. It could mention what 'live board' is or safety considerations, but it is mostly complete for its complexity.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description does not add parameter information because none exist. According to guidelines, with high schema coverage, baseline is 3; no extra value is provided for parameters.

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 'Save the live board to disk', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting that this save is required before render_board or run_drc can see live edits, which sets it apart from other board-modifying tools.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use: before render_board or run_drc for those tools to see edits. It does not list alternatives or when not to use, but the primary use case is clearly communicated.

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