manage_few_shot_examples

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It only lists actions without detailing side effects, persistence, error handling, or permissions needed for add/remove operations. Users are left uncertain about what happens after each 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and supported actions. Every word adds value; no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

Despite clear purpose, the description omits critical context such as return values (e.g., list output, success confirmation), the format of example objects, and any notes on domain knowledge usage. Given no output schema, the description should bridge this gap, but it does not.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'register domain-specific examples to improve SQL accuracy', which does not enhance parameter understanding. Parameter descriptions in the schema already adequately explain each parameter.

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 manages few-shot examples with explicit actions (list/add/remove) and specifies the purpose: registering domain-specific examples to improve SQL accuracy. This distinguishes it from siblings like manage_keyword_map by focusing on SQL examples.

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 implies usage for improving SQL accuracy via examples but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like run_query or smart_query. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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