manage_idea

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint, but description adds key constraint: delete not available. Returns object is stated. No contradictions. Could mention more about side effects or permissions, but sufficient.

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?

Compact, front-loaded with purpose, structured in clear sections (note, use when, actions, failure). Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

No output schema, but description states return value. Covers all critical aspects: actions, required params, failure modes, delete limitation. Fully sufficient for a create/update tool.

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 coverage is 100% (baseline 3). Description links action to required params ('create (title), update (idea_id)') and adds failure conditions, enhancing beyond schema. Does not detail all params, but enough context.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create or update an idea' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like manage_bar by explicitly noting delete is unavailable and providing context about the action types.

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?

Explicit 'USE WHEN' examples ('Add idea', 'Update idea status') and 'FAILS WHEN' conditions for missing required params. Also provides alternative for deletion (archive by updating status).

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