trust_printer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that trusted printers are flagged during discovery, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting, limits, permissions), reversibility, or error conditions. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 brief with two sentences and an Args line, front-loading the main action. No unnecessary words; efficient for a simple tool.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose and parameter meaning. However, it does not indicate return values or failure modes, leaving gaps for an agent to fully understand behavior.

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 has 0% description coverage for the 'host' parameter, but the description adds 'The hostname or IP address to trust,' providing basic meaning beyond the schema's title. However, it does not include format constraints or examples.

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 the tool adds a printer hostname/IP to a trusted whitelist, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like untrust_printer and list_trusted_printers, even without explicit comparison.

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 implies when to use the tool (to avoid warnings when connecting to a trusted printer) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like untrust_printer, leaving the agent to infer context.

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