add_rack

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Lacks details on side effects, idempotency, permissions, or constraints (e.g., what if rack already exists?). Only mentions the action and workflow.

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 sentences, but the second is long with a parenthetical. Still concise and front-loaded, though slightly dense.

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?

With 5 parameters, 4 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameter constraints, post-conditions, and error scenarios for a hardware configuration tool.

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 coverage is 0%; description mentions part_number example and default version but does not explain bus, drop, rack, or their valid values. The workflow hint references bus and drop but not as parameter definitions.

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 rack to a drop, with an example ('BME XBP 1200' in a remote EIO drop). It differentiates from siblings like add_io_module by describing a workflow.

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?

Explicitly guides when to use this tool (add rack) and then use add_io_module with specific instructions (set drop/bus to target the remote rack; remote drops start with a CRA adapter). Tells the user exactly how to proceed.

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