add_playbooks

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

Discloses draft lifecycle, fallback behavior for first enabled playbook, and uniqueness rules (case-insensitive, including archived). Without annotations, this is adequate but could mention permissions or error handling.

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?

Well-structured with front-loaded purpose, then details. Somewhat long but every sentence adds value. Could be slightly more terse.

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?

Covers key aspects: what playbook consists of, draft lifecycle, fallback, uniqueness. Refers to related tools. Could mention return value or error conditions, but adequate for agent use.

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 100%, but description adds value beyond schema: explains draft context, fallback, and references configure_playbooks for identity tools. Also clarifies batch addition and uniqueness constraints.

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 it adds one or more playbooks to a multi_agents agent, specifying the components: intent, prompt, tools, auth. It distinguishes from siblings like update_playbook (update) and get_playbooks (list).

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?

Provides context that edits go on draft, need publish_draft, and uniqueness constraints. However, does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives like configure_playbooks or update_playbook.

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