Tell Add

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the append-only ledger path, the default for when, the verbatim 20-word limit for words, and the ledger's role, though it does not cover permissions or failure behavior.

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 definition is dense and front-loads the core action, ledger location, and key fields. It is appropriately sized for a 7-parameter write tool, though the long parenthetical makes it slightly harder to scan.

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 absence of annotations, 7 parameters at 0% schema coverage, and the presence of an output schema, the description supplies most needed calling context. The only notable omission is an explicit explanation of the required project parameter.

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 explain parameters and largely does: id, what, words, source, when, and where are all defined with useful semantics. The required project parameter is only indirectly implied by the song/ledger context, leaving one 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?

States a specific verb and resource: log a new tell, defined as a fault the person hears and names. It also names the append-only ledger location and distinguishes a new tell from a repeat handled by tell_heard.

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?

Explicitly says when to reach for it: the first time the person names a fault in how something sounds. It also names the alternative for repeats: tell_heard.

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