add_sticker_pack

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It specifies the required URI format but does not mention idempotency, error handling, network requirements, or potential side effects like overwriting existing packs.

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?

Description is front-loaded with the primary action, followed by useful workflow guidance and URI format. No unnecessary words; three sentences are efficient and clear.

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 simple one-parameter tool without output schema, the description adequately covers the installation action and URI format. It hints at subsequent steps but omits details like installation confirmation or state changes. Still, it is largely complete for its simplicity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats the URI format already present in the schema's description, adding minimal new meaning beyond clarifying the expected format.

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 clearly states the action ('Install a Signal sticker pack') and the resource ('sticker pack from a signal.art URL'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by outlining the workflow: install first, then use list_sticker_packs to browse, then send_sticker or send_group_sticker to send.

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?

Description implies when to use this tool (when you have a signal.art URL) and provides a clear sequence of steps involving sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative approaches.

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