add_io_module

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

Discloses the action (add to slot) and defaults, but does not describe conflict behavior (e.g., if slot occupied), error conditions, or whether the operation is reversible. Without annotations, more detail would be beneficial.

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?

Single paragraph, front-loaded with purpose, followed by constraints and examples. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers key aspects for a 6-parameter tool: purpose, parameter constraints, defaults, and topology reference. Lacks return value or error handling, but adequate for typical usage.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning for part_number and version via examples, clarifies slot, and notes defaults for rack/drop/bus. Missing explicit explanation of drop negative value or bus string format, but sufficient for agent usage.

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 adds a hardware module to a rack slot, with specific examples (IO, communication). It distinguishes from sibling tools like remove_io_module and replace_io_module by focusing on addition.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on matching part_number and version to the hardware catalog, slot position, and defaults for rack/drop/bus. Refers to get_hardware for topology. Lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives but covers primary use context.

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