add_bookmark

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates a write operation ('Save') but omits consequences such as idempotency, overwrite behavior, or error handling. The output schema exists but is not referenced, and no details about state changes or side effects are given.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence adds value: the first states the core function, the second clarifies which parameters are required and the purpose of 'note'. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 and the existence of an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and two key parameters. However, it omits the 'url' and 'tags' parameters, and does not explain return values or behavior on duplicate URLs. It is adequate but not fully 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'title' parameter (required) and 'note' (optional comment), but does not mention the required 'url' parameter or the optional 'tags' array. Meaning is added for only half the parameters, and the critical 'url' is left undefined.

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 ('Save a link/bookmark') and the target ('to the vault'). It specifies the resource type (link/bookmark) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_note, which are for notes. The verb 'save' is precise.

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 implies usage for saving web links, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., add_note for text). No when-not-to-use scenarios or prerequisites are mentioned. The context is clear enough for a simple tool, but the absence of explicit alternatives is a gap.

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