mind_map_save

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description does not reveal whether saving overwrites an existing mind map, requires specific permissions, or any side effects. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and immediately conveys the tool's core action.

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 has 4 parameters (3 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to provide adequate context. It does not explain how to obtain mind_map_json, what source_ids are, or required permissions. The agent lacks information to invoke correctly.

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 only 50% (only mind_map_json has a description). The tool description adds no new parameter details; it only mentions 'generated Mind Map' which relates to mind_map_json but does not explain notebook_id, source_ids, or title. The agent is left guessing.

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 'Save a generated Mind Map to a notebook' clearly states the action (save), the object (generated Mind Map), and the destination (notebook). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like mind_map_generate, mind_map_delete, and mind_map_list, which have different purposes.

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 that this tool should be used after generating a mind map via mind_map_generate. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, though the context is clear.

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