wallabag_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful context about OAuth2 Bearer auth and password grant, but does not mention rate limits, response format, or other behavioral limits.

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 short and mostly front-loaded with scope and auth. It could order the action list before auth details, but there is little wasted text.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should ideally explain what actions like get and get_version return. It covers auth and help behavior but leaves the main return values unspecified, making it only minimally adequate for an agent to call confidently.

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 schema already documents all five parameters including action, target, body, query, and params. The description adds little beyond restating the action list and help behavior, which is appropriate baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 says it covers the info toolset and names the actions get and get_version, but 'info toolset' and 'get' are vague about the actual resource being retrieved. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like wallabag_config or wallabag_entries.

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 only usage guidance is that action=help with target returns one action's parameters. There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus wallabag_config, wallabag_entries, or other siblings, and no exclusions are stated.

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