add_user_toil

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

With no annotations, the description discloses basic behavior: it adds a TOIL entry and returns the ID. It mentions amount range and description max length, but lacks details on permissions, idempotency, or conflict handling.

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 concise with no fluff. It uses a clear structure: a one-line purpose, then bullet-like parameter descriptions, and a return statement. Every sentence adds value.

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 description explains the purpose, all parameters, and return value. However, it omits potential error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., user existence), and behavior on duplicate entries. For a simple add tool, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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% coverage, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining each parameter's purpose, the amount range (-5000 to 5000), and the description max length. This adds significant value beyond the bare 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 the verb 'Add' and the resource 'TOIL entry' with context 'for a user in a year'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete_user_toil' and 'update_user_toil' by specifying the action of adding.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or compare with other tools like 'book_holiday' or 'action_holiday'.

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