type_archive.push

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not state whether this operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, or modifies existing types. The term 'push' is vague and doesn't clarify if it inserts, appends, or overwrites.

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 very short at 5 words, which is concise but under-informative. It lacks structure and doesn't earn its place because it fails to convey necessary context about parameters or behavior.

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 has 3 required parameters, zero schema description coverage, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides virtually no information, making it impossible for an agent to use safely or 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 0%, so the description must add meaning for all 3 parameters. However, it mentions none of them (names, session_id, type_archive_id), leaving the agent to guess their roles or constraints. This is a significant gap.

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 states the tool pushes types to a type archive, but it lacks a verb that clarifies 'push' is adding or appending. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like type_archive.pull or type_archive.get, and the meaning of 'push' in this context is ambiguous.

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 like type_archive.create, type_archive.open, or type_archive.pull. There is no indication of prerequisites, e.g., that the type archive must already exist, or that session must be valid.

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