ops_preview_home_recommendations

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

With no annotations provided, the burden is on the description. It clearly states the tool is non-destructive (no writes) and explains the partial update behavior. It lacks detail on what the preview returns (errors, success confirmation, etc.), but the core behavioral traits are well communicated.

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 two succinct sentences with no filler. It front-loads the key action and constraints, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 of the nested modules schema and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and core behavior. It could be enhanced by mentioning the return type (e.g., validation errors or preview diff), but remains sufficient for an AI agent to understand the tool's role.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning beyond the raw schema by explaining that modules are replaced and others preserved. However, it does not explain workspace_code or reason parameters. The description adds context but not comprehensive parameter semantics.

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 validates and previews a partial home recommendation config without writing changes. It specifies that only supplied modules are replaced, omitted ones preserved. This differentiates it from sibling tools like ops_set_home_recommendations, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 previewing/validating changes before committing, and clarifies that omitted modules are preserved. However, it does not explicitly contrast with ops_set_home_recommendations or specify when not to use this tool. The guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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