personal_add_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the prerequisite about verbatim captures, but it does not describe the creation semantics, required effects, permission needs, reversibility, or what happens when the source is not a user supplement.

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 focused sentence with no filler, and the key prerequisite is placed in the second clause. It is compact, though it may be too terse given the tool's 20 parameters and no annotations.

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?

A 20-parameter creation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no sibling differentiation needs far more context. The description only covers one conditional path and leaves the meaning of most fields and the overall derived-record workflow unexplained.

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%, and the description only adds meaning for verbatim_refs through the prerequisite instruction. The other 19 parameters, including required fields like id, kind, and summary, receive no conceptual explanation in the description.

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 states a clear action and resource: '创建派生记录' (create derived record). It distinguishes the 'derived' nature of the record, which hints at its role among siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with personal_add_followup or personal_add_hypothesis.

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 a concrete usage condition: if the source is a supplement from the current user, a verbatim capture must exist first and verbatim_refs must be set. This is clear context for a specific scenario, but it does not give exclusions or alternatives.

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