Import Authorities

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context beyond annotations: explains the upsert mechanics ('same slug re-import updates name/url without creating duplicates') and states 'does not contact remote authority directories', which is not captured in 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?

Three sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage guideline, third explains behavioral traits. No filler; every sentence adds distinct value. The description is front-loaded with the core action.

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 tool has one parameter (array) fully described in schema, annotations present, and output schema exists (handles return value documentation). The description covers the upsert semantics, idempotency, and relation to sibling tools, making it fully informative for correct usage.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that slug is the import key (primary key for upsert) and that the operation is idempotent and non-destructive, which clarifies the behavior of the 'authorities' parameter beyond its schema definition.

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 'Upsert local public authority reference records by slug for request routing and discovery', specifying the verb (upsert) and resource (authority records by slug). It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly saying 'do not use for FOI request CRUD (create_request/update_request)' and recommends usage 'after list_authorities'.

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?

Provides explicit when to use ('after list_authorities when seeding or refreshing the catalog') and when not to use ('do not use for FOI request CRUD'). Also names alternative tools (list_authorities, create_request, update_request), offering clear guidance.

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