add_party_website

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

Annotations indicate non-readonly and non-destructive. The description adds 'Atomic — one PUT to Capsule', revealing the atomic nature and underlying API call. It does not contradict annotations and adds behavioral context beyond the structured fields.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. Each sentence adds value: purpose, usage guidance, and parameter clarification. Front-loaded with the most important information.

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 the essential purpose, usage, and parameter hints. However, it does not describe return values or error behavior, and there is no output schema. For a simple append operation, this is adequate but could be slightly more complete.

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 67%. The description adds value by clarifying the 'address' parameter with examples ('URL when service='URL' or a handle like '@acmeco'') and specifies that 'service' defaults to 'URL' if omitted, which is not in the schema description.

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 states 'Append a single website / social handle to a party' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from the sibling 'update_party.websites' by explicitly stating 'Use this instead of update_party.websites for single-entry adds.'

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 clear guidance: 'Use this instead of update_party.websites for single-entry adds.' This indicates when to use this tool vs the alternative. It does not mention any further exclusions or prerequisites, but the guidance is sufficient.

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