set_glossary

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true; the description adds the file-location behavior (next to the subtitle) and that it creates or modifies the file. However, it does not disclose whether existing files are overwritten or any other side effects, though the annotations reduce the burden.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates the core action, target file, and placement in one line.

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?

With two required parameters, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, this description leaves major gaps: what exactly 'subtitle' refers to, what shape 'glossary' should take, and how existing files are handled. The description covers the what but not the how or when.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'subtitle' string or the 'glossary' object. The phrase 'next to the subtitle' implicitly hints that 'subtitle' identifies the target location, but this is too weak to meaningfully compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 states a specific verb ('create/modify') and a specific resource ('<work>.glossary.json' placed next to the work's subtitle). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like set_style or translate_subtitle.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage context must be inferred entirely from the tool name and the file-placement detail.

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