bricks_add_menu_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions basic behavior but fails to disclose side effects, required permissions, error conditions, or what happens if the menu_id doesn't exist. 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 extremely concise with only two sentences, no filler, and front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence earns its place by either defining the operation or providing a critical usage hint.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the essential usage: adding a single item, supported types, and submenu functionality. It does not explain return values or errors, but is sufficient for a simple creation tool.

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 schema documents all parameters. The description adds value by summarizing supported item types (custom, page, post, category) and reinforcing the use of 'parent' for submenus, which agents might miss in the schema.

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 action ('Add'), the resource ('menu item'), and the context ('existing menu'). It distinguishes from siblings like bricks_create_menu (create menu) and bricks_delete_menu_item (delete) by specifying the addition operation.

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 for when to use the tool: adding a single item to an existing menu. It offers guidance on submenu creation via the 'parent' parameter but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it.

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