cronos_aggiungi_a_progetto

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

Discloses key behavioral traits: if entry exists, adds H4 sub-section avoiding fragmentation; if not, creates standard entry. Also describes return confirmation modes. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden and satisfies it well.

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?

Well-structured with three clear sections: behavior, usage guidance, and parameters. No redundant sentences, front-loaded with key purpose. Every sentence earns its place.

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 11 parameters, 3 required, and no output schema, the description fully covers behavior, usage, parameter meanings, and return type expectation. No gaps identified.

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. Description adds value by noting constraints like 'Nome esatto del progetto (deve corrispondere all'H3 esistente)' which supplements schema. Parameters are explained clearly but mostly align with schema.

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 it adds content to an existing project entry in the diary, distinguishing between adding to an existing entry or creating a new one. It explicitly differentiates from sibling tool cronos_aggiungi_entry by specifying use cases.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use scenarios (adding work to a project already in today's diary, with example phrases) and clearly names the alternative (cronos_aggiungi_entry) for new project entries.

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