cmmn-add_model_to_case

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that a container is created and an ID is returned, but it does not mention side effects like overwriting existing items, permissions required, or what happens on failure. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no extraneous information. 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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main functionality and return value adequately. It could mention error handling or prerequisites, but is sufficient for a tool of this complexity.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for case_id, model_id, and prefix. The description adds minimal extra meaning, only rephrasing the prefix purpose. Since schema does the heavy lifting, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool adds items from a Case Plan Model to an existing case, creates a container, and returns a model_item_id. This distinguishes it from other cmmn tools like cmmn-create_task or cmmn-execute_stage, 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 does not explicitly indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as cmmn-create_task or cmmn-instantiate. It implies usage for incorporating a pre-existing model into a case but lacks explicit guidance or exclusions.

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