add_duration_assertion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose the core effect ('failing the sample if it takes longer than maxDurationMs') and the placement. However, it does not state that this mutates the test plan, that the sampler must already exist, or what happens if parentId is invalid.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. The action, placement, and behavior are front-loaded, and every phrase adds information.

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 add-operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main action and effect, but omits prerequisites (existing plan/sampler), mutation side effects, and error conditions. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains maxDurationMs (the duration threshold) and parentId (must be an HTTP sampler). It does not explain planId or the optional name parameter, leaving a gap for those parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Add'), names the resource ('Duration Assertion'), specifies placement ('under an HTTP sampler'), and states the behavioral effect ('failing the sample if it takes longer than maxDurationMs'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling assertion tools like add_response_assertion and add_size_assertion.

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 phrase 'under an HTTP sampler' gives clear placement context, telling the agent that parentId must reference an HTTP sampler. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for this simple add-operation.

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