save_paragraph_explanation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that saves are local, that they overwrite existing explanations, and that they are reused via get_paragraph's cached_explanation field. This is meaningful behavioral transparency, though it omits error cases or permission requirements.

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 three concise, front-loaded sentences. It starts with the core action, then explains the reuse mechanism, then gives a usage scenario. Every sentence adds value without fluff.

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 save tool with three fully described parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers purpose, persistence, overwrite semantics, and how the saved data is later used. It lacks detail on error handling or authentication, but these are not critical for this tool's basic operation.

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%, and the schema already documents all three parameters clearly. The description adds context that std_num and para_num match get_paragraph usage, but this is minor. Overall it provides limited additional meaning 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 clearly states a specific verb and resource: saves an explanation for a particular standard paragraph locally. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly tying to get_paragraph's cached_explanation behavior, making the tool's unique role obvious.

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 clear context on when to use it: to save helpful or frequently used practical explanations for reuse. It also explains the overwrite behavior. It does not explicitly say 'use this instead of X', but the connection to get_paragraph provides adequate usage guidance.

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