Save Url

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantive behavior the annotations cannot convey: asynchronous background enrichment, the already_saved=true return signal, that tags and list are still applied on a duplicate, and that title/note are not overwritten. That is exactly the kind of nuance an agent needs before calling.

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 paragraphs, front-loaded with the core action, then the dedup caveat. The parenthetical in the second paragraph is dense but each clause carries information an agent needs; no filler sentences.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values do not need spelling out, and the background-processing disclosure covers the main behavioral surprise. Minor incompleteness remains around the undocumented boolean flags and how long background enrichment takes to complete, but nothing blocking.

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 71%, so most parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description only clarifies the tags/list semantics in the dedup path. The archived and favourited booleans have no meaning provided in either the schema or the description, leaving a real gap that the description does not compensate for.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Save a web page as a bookmark") and immediately expands on what saving entails: fetching, storing a readable copy, and background AI tagging/summarization. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like update_bookmark and tag_bookmark.

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?

Explicitly describes the duplicate case and redirects to update_bookmark when title/note must be changed, which is real routing guidance. It does not cover adjacent cases (e.g. when to attach a tag to an existing bookmark via tag_bookmark instead of re-saving), so it falls just short of full when/when-not coverage.

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