Tell Import

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the precondition (empty ledger only), ordering ('checked first'), and non-destructiveness ('source file is left as it is'). It omits what happens on failure when the ledger is non-empty.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and each carries real information (precondition, non-destructive behavior, no-op case). Slightly more than strictly needed but nothing wasteful.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the description covers preconditions and side effects. What's missing is failure behavior and explicit parameter meaning, minor given the simple two-param surface.

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 schema documents neither parameter. The description implies 'project' via 'this song' and 'path' via the tells.jsonl file reference, but adds no explicit format or semantics for either parameter.

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 ('Adopt') and resource ('tells.jsonl ... as this song's tell ledger'), making clear it ingests an existing hand-kept ledger. It does not explicitly name the related siblings (tell_add, tell_check) it differs from, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Gives clear when-not guidance: 'goes only into an empty ledger' and 'A song whose ledger is already at <song>/notes/tells.jsonl needs no import.' It does not point to an alternative tool for the non-empty case, so it lacks explicit sibling routing.

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