Create Organizers Tools Merge

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key destructive outcome ('deletes from_id'). However it omits irreversibility, permission requirements, and what happens to recipes or references pointing at the deleted 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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the operation and ending with the consequence; nothing wasted and 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. But for a destructive mutation with zero annotation coverage and an undocumented third parameter, the description should say more about irreversibility and reference handling.

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 0%, so the description must compensate; it does clarify the roles of fromId (source, destroyed) and toId (target, survivor), which is real added value. It says nothing about the third parameter (accept-language) and uses snake_case names that don't match the camelCase schema keys exactly.

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?

States a specific verb plus resource ('Merges the from_id tool into the to_id tool') and spells out the resulting side effect of deleting the source. An agent can tell exactly what happens, though the description never contrasts this with sibling merge tools (categories/tags) or with plain updates.

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?

No guidance on when to merge versus when to simply rename/update a tool via update_organizers_tools_by_item, and no prerequisites (e.g., that both IDs must already exist or be in the same group). The agent must infer the trigger condition entirely.

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