zadd

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

The description omits important behavioral details: it states 'Add' but does not clarify that ZADD in Redis also updates the score if the member already exists. No side effects, permissions, or atomicity are discussed, and no annotations are present to offset the lack of disclosure.

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 extremely concise, using a clear 'Args' and 'Returns' format. Every sentence serves a purpose, with no wasted words.

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?

While the description covers the basic operation, it lacks details about behavior when the member already exists (update vs. strict add). Given the tool's low complexity and no annotations, the description could be more complete to support correct invocation.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description alone defines parameter semantics. It explains 'key' as the sorted set key, 'score' as the member's score, 'member' as the member to add, and 'expiration' as time in seconds. This adds valuable meaning beyond the bare schema titles.

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 verb 'Add' and the resource 'member to a Redis sorted set', making the tool's purpose evident. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like zrange or zrem, which also operate on sorted sets.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as zrange or zrem. There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios where the tool is appropriate or should be avoided.

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