add_widgets

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

The description discloses default values for 'columns' and 'rows' and the return structure, which adds value beyond the input schema. However, it lacks information on side effects, destructiveness, or permissions. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but only partially addresses it.

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 three sentences and to the point. It is efficient but could be more structured with bullet points. No waste is present.

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 that there is no output schema, the description includes the return format. It covers input shape, default behavior, and return. Missing details like error handling or limits, but otherwise sufficient for a batch tool.

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 input schema is extremely sparse (array of objects with additionalProperties true, 0% coverage). The description compensates fully by detailing each field (widget_type, parent_id?, left?, etc.), providing complete semantic meaning that the schema lacks.

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 'Add multiple widgets in one tool call,' which distinguishes it from the likely sibling 'add_widget' (not listed but referenced). It specifies the action and resource explicitly.

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 batch addition by referencing 'each entry is the same shape as add_widget's args,' but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_widget. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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