add_entry

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses significant behavioral traits: entries are validated, append-only, and the private flag controls inclusion in published changelogs. This goes beyond a simple add action, though it could mention what happens on duplicate or invalid input.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core action and then clarify an important behavioral nuance. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 tool has 6 parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers the main purpose and private flag logic, but omits key details about bump, files, details, and the overall required parameters. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for missing parameter semantics.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only explains the 'private' parameter's effect. Other parameters (bump, files, details, category, description) are not semantically described. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving parameter meanings largely implicit.

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's function: appends a validated single entry to the store (append-only). The verb 'appends' and the append-only constraint distinguish it from sibling tools like edit_entry and delete_entry, making its purpose obvious and unique.

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 adding new entries (append-only), but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. It could be clearer by contrasting with edit_entry or delete_entry, but the append-only note provides implicit guidance.

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