Add Form Fields

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: preview-only environment, required permissions, field code constraints, option key-label matching, lookup field types, and deployment necessity. It does not mention consequences of duplicate field codes or error handling, but still provides substantial transparency.

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 well-structured with front-loaded purpose and environment, followed by constraints and usage tips. Every sentence adds information. Minor redundancy (e.g., 'preview environment only' repeated) could be trimmed, but overall efficient.

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 complexity (nested fields, subtable, lookup), the description covers key points: environment, permissions, field code rules, selection options, lookup field types, and the need to deploy. It sets context by recommending pre-check with kintone-get-form-fields. It could mention the revision parameter's error behavior, but that is in the schema.

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 the schema handles parameter descriptions. The description adds value by specifying field code constraints (max 128 chars, no leading numbers, only '_'), option key-label matching, and lookup field type guidelines, which go beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'Add new fields to a kintone app (preview environment only)' which is a specific verb+resource. It differentiates from siblings like kintone-update-form-fields and kintone-get-form-fields by mentioning 'preview environment' and suggesting to check existing fields first.

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?

It clearly explains when to use (adding new fields to preview) and provides prerequisites (App Management permissions). It gives actionable guidance: 'Use kintone-get-form-fields first to check existing fields' and 'Changes require kintone-deploy-app to apply to live app.' However, it could explicitly state not to use for updating existing fields.

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