yd_vcards_add

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It fails to disclose behaviors like what happens if the campaign doesn't exist, whether duplicates are allowed, or required permissions. The lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about side effects.

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 short sentence, making it concise. However, it is arguably too minimal for a tool with 11 parameters and no annotations, sacrificing utility for brevity.

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 complexity (11 parameters, 6 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain how the VCard data is used, what the return value is, or any constraints (e.g., uniqueness). The agent lacks critical context to use the tool effectively.

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 coverage is high (82%), so the schema already describes most parameters. The description adds no additional meaning or examples beyond what is in the schema. For instance, the cryptic format of 'work_time' remains unexplained.

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 indicates the verb 'Add' and the resource 'VCard (business card)' to a campaign. It distinguishes from sibling tools like yd_vcards_delete and yd_vcards_get, which are for removal and retrieval, respectively.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as prerequisites (e.g., campaign must exist) or context (e.g., after creating a campaign). The description implies usage only through the action 'Add'.

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