add_break_loop

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

No annotations provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits, such as whether the operation is destructive, requires special permissions, or has side effects. The description is too minimal to inform the agent about the tool's behavior.

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 sentence, which is concise but sacrifices essential detail. It is not front-loaded with critical info; it is merely a restatement of the tool name.

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 the tool has 5 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what a 'break loop command' is, how to construct parameters, or what happens after addition.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names. All 5 parameters are left unexplained, despite 0% schema description coverage. The agent has no clue what 'projectPath', 'mapId', 'eventId', 'pageIndex', or 'insertPosition' mean in 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Add') and the resource ('break loop command'), and implies it modifies an event. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'add_loop', which could be confused.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'add_loop' or other event editing tools). No context on prerequisites or typical use cases.

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