set_conversation_starred

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

Beyond annotations (idempotentHint true, readOnlyHint false), the description adds the side effect of creating notification context when needed. This provides useful behavioral insight beyond what annotations alone offer.

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 purpose, then parameter guidance, then side effect. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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?

The description covers purpose and parameters but lacks explicit mention of the exclusive-or constraint between channel and dm (though implied). The side effect is mentioned. For a tool with a complex parameter constraint, this is a gap.

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?

Although the schema has 100% coverage, its descriptions are minimal ('a string that will be trimmed'). The tool description enriches this by explaining that channel is a name or ID and dm is a DM ID or participant display name, adding meaningful context.

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 verb ('set') and resource ('starred state for exactly one conversation'), distinguishing it from siblings like set_conversation_closed. It specifies the required parameters and scope.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (with either channel or dm and starred) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives. The mention of 'exactly one conversation' implies a limitation.

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