Save a lesson

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses size limits (10 MB max, 100 lesson cap), privacy default, return value (metadata plus short-lived view URL), and scope requirement (lessons:write). There is no contradiction.

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, front-loaded with purpose and key constraints. Every sentence adds value. No 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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, constraints, return, usage context, scope, and durability. It is complete for an agent to decide to invoke the tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add per-parameter details beyond what the schema provides, but it does add overall constraints (max size, max lessons) that are not in the schema. This is adequate but not exceptional.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Save', the resource 'single self-contained HTML lesson', and the destination 'user's private LingoChunk library'. It also lists key constraints (10 MB max, up to 100 lessons, private by default). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_library or add_card.

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 says 'Use this to keep a lesson the lingochunk-lesson skill produced', providing clear context for when to use. It also mentions the required scope 'lessons:write'. While it doesn't explicitly state alternatives or when not to use, the context is sufficient.

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