manage_widget_dependency

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 the confirm='approve' parameter as a safety mechanism for mutations but does not disclose side effects, destructive potential, permissions required, or error states. The agent gets some behavioral insight but not enough for complex operations.

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, using two short sentences to convey the core purpose and a key usage tip. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool's complexity (14 parameters, multiple actions and targets), the description is too sparse. It lacks explanation of different actions, target types, output expectations, and edge cases. The agent would need to rely heavily on the schema, which is not always sufficient for effective invocation.

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?

With 71% schema description coverage, the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds value by suggesting a workflow (list first) and implying that confirm='approve' is needed for mutations, which goes beyond the schema's static parameter descriptions.

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 tool performs CRUD and link/unlink operations on widget Angular providers and CSS/JS dependencies. It uses specific verbs and resource nouns, and the hint 'Use action=list first for sys_ids' further distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on analysis or retrieval.

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 gives explicit usage guidance by advising to use action=list first to obtain sys_ids, and it mentions the confirm='approve' requirement. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or provide alternatives among the sibling tools.

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