bexio Project Planning

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it mentions that delete is permanent, work package updates are partial PATCHes while milestone updates are POSTs, and list supports pagination with limit/offset. No contradictions with annotations.

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 informative and front-loaded with the core purpose, but it is somewhat lengthy and mixes multiple pieces of information in a single paragraph. A more structured format could improve readability, but it avoids wasted words.

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 complexity (7 parameters, nested objects, multiple resources and actions), the description covers behavior well. It does not explain return values or list results format, but for a CRUD-like tool this is acceptable. The annotations and schema provide additional context.

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 description groups fields by resource type and explains which fields apply to milestones vs. work packages. It clarifies that name is the only required field on create, and that payload is structured accordingly. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's individual parameter descriptions.

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 it manages milestones and work packages of a project using the bexio 3.0 API, with specific verbs and resource names. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the project-planning sub-resources.

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 explicitly explains how to set the resource, action, and project_id parameters, and outlines the required payload fields for each action. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the specificity is sufficient for most use cases.

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