Add Credit Package

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

Annotations already indicate add operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false). The description adds no further behavioral context, such as whether duplicate adds are allowed or what side effects occur (e.g., credit consumption).

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?

One sentence, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is minimal but adequate. However, it could mention expected return value or confirmation behavior, especially since annotations are not fully informative.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters ('Collection ID' and 'Credit package ID to add'). The description does not add any 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 'Add a credit package to a collection' clearly states the action (add) and the primary resource (credit package) and target (collection). It distinguishes from sibling tools like transkribus_coll_credit_remove_package.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., transkribus_coll_credit_list for viewing packages), nor does it mention prerequisites like whether the collection or credit package must exist.

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