chaprola_import

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects. It only says 'import', implying file creation, but does not mention whether existing files are overwritten, what happens on failure, or whether authentication is required beyond the BAA note. The BAA warning is a compliance hint but not a full behavioral disclosure.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. The second sentence provides a necessary compliance warning. No waste.

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?

Despite complete schema, the description lacks information about return values, side effects, or the distinction between json and fhir formats. The BAA warning is useful but incomplete, and the absence of annotations/output schema makes the description insufficient for confident use in complex scenarios.

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 input schema already contains full descriptions for all 5 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter meaning; it only reiterates 'JSON data' which is already in the schema. Thus 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 it imports JSON data into Chaprola .F/.DA files. It is specific, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling import variants like chaprola_import_url or chaprola_import_process, so it doesn't fully earn a 5.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The BAA warning is a compliance prerequisite, not a tool-selection guideline. There is no mention of using chaprola_import_url for URL-based imports or chaprola_import_process for pipeline processing.

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