evite_add_guest

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

Annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint=false), so the description carries the burden and delivers: no emails sent until evite_send, confirm-gated dry-run, and guests only persist on finalized events. These are beyond what annotations state, with no contradiction.

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?

Three concise sentences, each carrying distinct critical information: purpose, side-effect, and persistence caveat. Efficiently front-loaded with no filler or redundancy.

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?

Without an output schema, the description explains the dry-run preview and confirm-gating, but does not specify what a successful confirmed response contains. Still, it covers the most crucial operational context: draft status, email absence, and persistence limitations.

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%, with each parameter already described. The tool description mostly restates the confirm gating already present in the schema, adding little new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States 'Add guests to an event's draft (un-sent) guest list' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like evite_remove_guest and evite_update_guest. It also adds 'Nothing is emailed until you evite_send', reinforcing the tool's scope.

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 clear context: use for draft un-sent guest lists, confirm-gated with dry-run preview, and a persistence caveat telling when guests actually persist. It does not explicitly name alternatives like evite_update_guest, but the draft/sent distinction makes the intended usage apparent.

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