robot_annotate

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

The description lacks details on side effects, such as whether the ontology is modified in place or a new file is created, and does not mention required permissions or state changes. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only partially addresses behavioral traits.

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 three sentences, covers the main purpose first, and provides a clear example for annotation format. No extraneous information.

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?

Despite the tool having 21 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description only explains a small subset. Important aspects like output behavior, error conditions, and workflow are missing, making it incomplete for complex usage.

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?

Only three parameters (annotation, link_annotation, language_annotation) receive some explanation. The remaining 18 parameters (e.g., input, output, remove_annotations) are not described, leaving significant gaps given 0% schema coverage.

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 metadata annotations to an ontology, with specific actions like setting ontology IRI and version IRI. The name 'robot_annotate' is self-explanatory and distinct from sibling tools such as robot_convert or robot_filter.

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 robot_rename or robot_remove. No context about prerequisites or scenarios is given.

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