Add Records

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that some fields cannot be registered and that get-form-fields should be used first. However, it does not mention behavior such as error handling on invalid fields, limits beyond schema (e.g., rate limits), or the non-destructive nature (records are added, not overwritten). Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences: the first states the core action, the second provides essential prerequisite and restriction. No unnecessary words, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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 complex input schema (many field types) and the existence of an output schema (presumably covering return values), the description adequately covers the key behavioral aspects: the required preliminary tool and unsupported fields. It is complete for a creation tool, though additional context on error responses or batch limits could further enhance 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by reminding users to use get-form-fields to learn field codes and listing unregisterable fields. This contextual guidance helps avoid errors, but the schema already fully describes each parameter.

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 verb ('Add') and resource ('multiple records to a kintone app'), and the name 'kintone-add-records' reinforces this. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update and delete by focusing solely on creation.

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 explicitly instructs users to first call kintone-get-form-fields to discover field codes and formats, and lists fields that cannot be registered (e.g., LOOKUP copies, STATUS). This provides practical guidance on prerequisites and limitations, though it does not explicitly contrast with other mutation tools.

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