sw_create_friend

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

Beyind the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that without confirm:true a dry-run preview is returned and NO network call is made, while with confirm:true the friend is added. This reveals the gating mechanism and side effects, adding significant transparency.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains zero redundant wording. Every phrase adds value.

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?

Covers the core behavior and side effects thoroughly for a 4-parameter tool, but doesn't describe the content of the dry-run preview. Given no output schema, a brief note on the preview would improve completeness, but it's not critical.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics for confirm by explaining the network-call behavior, which is not fully captured in the schema description. It reinforces user_email's purpose but doesn't over-specify.

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 ('Add') with a clear resource ('Splitwise friend') and method ('by email, sends invite'). It explicitly distinguishes the dry-run vs actual behavior, making it distinct from sibling tools like sw_list_friends or sw_delete_friend.

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 clearly explains when to use confirm:true vs false, providing key usage context. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling list and the purpose statement make the intended use obvious.

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