misp_add_object

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'add' without mentioning side effects (e.g., no update to existing objects), required permissions, idempotency, or error conditions. The description is adequate for a straightforward creation tool but lacks depth.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place; there is no unnecessary verbosity.

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's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema) and the presence of sibling tools, the description is minimal. It provides the essential purpose but does not explain return values, validation, or how the object interacts with the event. A more complete description would improve agent accuracy.

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%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the parameter descriptions already present. The phrase 'structured group of attributes' hints at the 'attributes' parameter, but the schema already explains it. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Add' and the resource 'MISP object' with a parenthetical explaining what an object is. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like misp_add_attribute or misp_add_attributes_bulk, which could confuse an agent about which tool to use.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only implies usage for adding a structured object to an event, but lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., event existence) or situations where other tools are more appropriate.

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