add_asset_to_lightbox

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the operation. It omits important traits such as whether duplicates are allowed, permission requirements, idempotency, or what happens if the lightbox or asset does not exist.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and object. There is no extraneous information or repetition, making it efficiently scannable.

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, yet the description provides only the basic action. It lacks information about return values, errors, side effects, or operation semantics, which are important for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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% with both parameters described as 'ID of the resource', which is generic. The description adds no further meaning about which ID corresponds to the asset versus the lightbox. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage, though the descriptions are unhelpful.

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 'Add an asset to a lightbox' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly stating the action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'add_asset_to_collection' and 'remove_lightbox_membership_assets' by naming the target container (lightbox) explicitly.

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, nor are there any prerequisites or conditions mentioned. The description solely states the action without any context on appropriate scenarios, edge cases, or exclusions.

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