skylight_add_reward_points

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that points can be granted or deducted, but it does not describe side effects such as balance updates, whether negative balances are allowed, authorization requirements, or what the tool returns after execution.

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 compact sentence with no filler. It communicates the core operation immediately and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It leaves out the meaning of frameId, any behavioral consequences, return value expectations, and guidance relative to reward-related sibling tools, so it is not complete enough for reliable invocation.

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?

The schema already documents 'points' and 'category_ids', and the description essentially restates that information without adding new meaning. The frameId parameter remains completely undocumented, and the description does not clarify its role or relationship to the other parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Grant or deduct'), a clear resource ('reward points'), and a target ('family members'). It is distinct from siblings like skylight_get_reward_points, skylight_create_reward, and skylight_redeem_reward, so an agent can tell what operation this performs.

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 states the operation but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as skylight_redeem_reward or skylight_get_reward_points. It also does not mention prerequisites like having an existing reward category or whether points can go negative beyond the schema note.

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