intercom_set_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the summary is visible to other sessions ('so other sessions can discover'), which is useful context. However, it does not mention whether this overwrites an existing summary, any permission requirements, or other side effects.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and purpose. Every word earns its place, with no extraneous information.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is mostly adequate. It covers what the tool does and why, but lacks key details like overwriting behavior, any limitations beyond schema, and differentiation from similar sibling tools.

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 one parameter ('summary') with 0% description coverage. The description adds semantics by characterizing it as a 'short status summary' and indicates its purpose (visibility to other sessions), compensating for the lack of schema-level description. It does not explicitly name the parameter but the connection is clear.

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 ('publish') and resource ('short status summary'), clearly stating the tool writes a summary visible to other sessions. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like intercom_status or intercom_list, but the action is unambiguous.

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 it: when you want other sessions to discover what this session is doing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among the sibling tools (e.g., intercom_status, intercom_list).

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