Import App

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

Annotations already mark the operation as non-read and non-idempotent, and the description adds useful behavioral context: the request body is the bundle itself, authentication is B2B/tenant-actor, and domainNameOverride renames the domain. It does not detail side effects or return value, but nothing contradicts the annotations.

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?

Four short, dense sentences with the core action and endpoint front-loaded; every sentence adds information (action, endpoint format, auth, override behavior, prerequisite). No filler.

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 2-parameter import tool with no output schema, the description covers what is imported, where the bundle comes from, how auth works, and the optional override. It could briefly state the outcome or confirm optionality of parameters, but the essential invocation context is present.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying that bundle is the exported bundle from ethora-app-export-v2 and that the JSON body is the bundle itself, and it reinforces what domainNameOverride does. This is helpful beyond the terse schema property descriptions.

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?

Description names a specific action and resource: 'Import an App from a bundle produced by ethora-app-export-v2'. It also identifies the HTTP route and body format, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does; the App-domain scope distinguishes it from import tools for other entities such as ethora-agents-import-v2.

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?

States clear prerequisites ('bundle produced by ethora-app-export-v2') and auth context ('B2B / tenant-actor auth'), which tell an agent when this tool applies. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it, but the App-versus-agent distinction plus the bundle requirement is enough guidance.

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