add_object_property_assertion

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

With no annotations, the description adds the behavioral disclosure that changes are not auto-saved. But it lacks information on idempotency, error handling, or whether duplicate assertions are allowed.

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 short sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is stated first, followed by a critical behavioral note. Highly concise.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the important save requirement. Minor gaps exist, such as return value and duplicate handling, but it is largely complete.

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 parameter descriptions. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 action 'add object property assertion' and the resource 'individual', with a helpful diagram (subject --property--> object). It is distinct from sibling tools like add_class or add_individual.

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 provides a crucial usage note: modifications are not saved automatically and require calling save_ontology. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or exclude any scenarios.

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