modify_shelves

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions 'WRITE permission' and lists actions (shelve, unshelve, update, delete, unshelve_to_changelist), but lacks details on consequences (e.g., what 'force' does, data loss risks). The warning 'use with caution' is in the schema, not description.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality. It is concise with no wasted words, though it could benefit from slightly more context.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the basics but does not explain return values (though output schema exists) or detail nuances like the difference between 'unshelve' and 'unshelve_to_changelist'. Adequate but with gaps.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description merely summarizes the actions (create/delete, update, unshelve) already detailed in the 'action' enum. It adds no new meaning beyond the schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Create/delete, update shelves and unshelve files', using specific verbs and the resource 'shelves'. It also notes 'WRITE permission', distinguishing it from the read-only sibling 'query_shelves'.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only implies usage for shelf modifications. Sibling names like 'query_shelves' suggest a read/write split, but no clear guidance is provided.

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