add_file_flows

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (modification), destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds that it 'Skips existing links silently', which clarifies idempotency behavior. However, there is no additional context on permissions, rollback, or partial failures beyond what annotations imply.

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 concise sentences, directly stating purpose and key behavior. No fluff, front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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?

For a simple batch operation with one parameter, the description covers purpose, efficiency, and behavior on duplicates. It lacks details on error handling or return values, but given the lack of output schema and simplicity, it is largely complete.

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 100%, so the schema already describes the 'links' parameter as an array of tuples. The description does not add any new detail about parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Batch-assign multiple files to flows', specifying the action (batch-assign), resource (files to flows), and scope. It also distinguishes from the sibling 'add_file_to_flow' by highlighting efficiency.

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 explicitly mentions efficiency over multiple add_file_to_flow calls, guiding when to use the batch version. It also notes that existing links are skipped silently, implying idempotent behavior. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios.

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