upstash_redis_incr

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention key behaviors: that INCR creates the key if it doesn't exist (initializing to 0), that the operation is atomic, and that it returns the new value. This omission could lead to incorrect assumptions.

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 short sentence, which is concise but overly minimal. It lacks any structure (e.g., bullet points, parameter details) and omits important qualifying information that would fit in a concise format without being verbose.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, along with four undocumented parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It does not address the behavior on missing keys, return value, or parameter semantics, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage. The tool description does not explain any of the four required parameters (api_key, email, db_id, key). The purpose of api_key, email, and db_id is not obvious from names alone, leaving the agent guessing about authentication or database identification.

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 (increment) and the resource (a numeric key in Upstash Redis). It sufficiently distinguishes from sibling tools like upstash_redis_get, upstash_redis_set, upstash_redis_del, and upstash_redis_list_keys.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use set with incrementing logic or the atomic nature of INCR. The description gives no context for appropriate use cases.

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