add_code_pattern

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies mutation via 'Add' but does not state whether duplicates are allowed, whether existing patterns are overwritten, or any validation or naming constraints.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the verb and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 description is adequate for basic tool selection but lacks context about return behavior, error conditions, or how this tool relates to other pattern-related tools. Given the nested object schema and absence of annotations, a bit more guidance would improve completeness.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for both top-level parameters and all nested pattern fields, though the pattern parameter itself lacks a top-level description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond reinforcing the concept of a 'code pattern'.

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 action ('Add'), the object ('a reusable code pattern'), and the destination ('project library'). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like list_patterns or get_top_patterns.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it. It doesn't mention that this is the create path for reusable patterns or whether it should be used before list_patterns or other retrieval tools.

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