add_asset_to_collection

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'Add an asset to a collection', without revealing side effects, idempotency, permissions, or error behavior. This is insufficient for a mutation operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It is concise, but the extreme brevity leaves out important details, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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?

The tool is a mutation with no annotations and no output schema. The one-sentence description does not cover expected outcomes, prerequisites, or contextual information needed to invoke correctly. Similar tools like update_collection provide more context, making this under-specified.

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 100%, but the descriptions are generic ('ID of the resource'). The parameter names collection_id and asset_id are self-explanatory, so the tool description adds no additional meaning. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema exists and names are clear, though the descriptions are low-quality.

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 operation: adding an asset to a collection, with specific verb and resources. It does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like add_asset_to_lightbox, but the resource types are distinct, making the purpose clear.

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 usage context is provided. It does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The description simply restates the action without guiding selection.

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