manage_key_result

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description adds concrete behavior: what actions exist, what each returns, and the conditions under which calls fail. It does not over-explain, but it goes beyond the annotation by describing return behavior and required preconditions per action.

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 compact and scannable, using labeled sections (USE WHEN, Actions, Returns, FAILS WHEN) that front-load the most important operational info. Every line carries information; there is no filler.

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?

For a 6-parameter CRUD tool with no output schema, the description covers action selection, required arguments, return values, and failure modes. It is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly without additional documentation.

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?

Although the schema has 100% parameter coverage, the description adds action-specific meaning the schema does not: create requires name+target_value, update/delete require key_result_id, and omitting these causes failure. This materially reduces ambiguity around which parameters matter for which action.

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 opens with 'Create, update, or delete a key result,' a clear verb-resource pair that defines the tool's CRUD scope. It distinguishes itself from read-only siblings like get_key_result and list_key_results by explicitly naming its write actions.

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?

It provides explicit 'USE WHEN' triggers ('Add KR', 'Update progress', 'Delete KR') and a 'FAILS WHEN' section that routes the agent to list_key_results when an ID is missing. This gives both inclusion and exclusion criteria with an alternative.

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