shiori_add_bookmark

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose that Shiori may override the provided title or excerpt, nor does it discuss behavior on duplicate URLs or archive creation effects. The schema descriptions provide some behavioral hints, but the description itself lacks transparency.

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 usage details and behavioral context. It is not necessarily too brief, but it could be more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

With 6 parameters and an output schema, the description should at least mention return values, authentication needs, or duplicate handling. The current minimal text leaves significant gaps in understanding, especially without annotations.

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%, and the schema already details each parameter (e.g., tags conversion, title override). The description adds no extra parameter meaning, but the baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the job.

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 'Add a bookmark to Shiori' clearly states the verb (add) and resource (bookmark to Shiori). It distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete, get, update, and search.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like shiori_update_bookmark or shiori_update_bookmark_fields. No prerequisites or context about duplicate handling are mentioned.

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