Import a demo

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

With no annotations, the description discloses important behaviors: it waits for completion, never overwrites existing user pages, and takes one to a few minutes. It does not mention failure handling or what happens to non-user settings, but it provides substantial behavioral context beyond the bare operation.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant words. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by concise behavioral details. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool.

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?

The description covers the key aspects: what is imported, that it blocks until done, preservation of user pages, and expected duration. It lacks explicit return value or error behavior, but given the simplicity and absence of an output schema, it is reasonably complete. A note on failure outcomes would be a minor improvement.

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 fully documents the single parameter (slug) with a clear reference to sweipe_list_demos, covering 100% of parameter semantics. The tool description does not add extra parameter detail, which aligns with the baseline of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 action (import), the resource (demo packages), and the specific content affected (pages, menus, images, settings, products when WooCommerce is active). It distinguishes itself from siblings like sweipe_list_demos (listing) and sweipe_import_status (checking status) by focusing on the import operation itself.

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 provides context about what the tool does and its blocking nature, and implies usage via the slug parameter sourced from sweipe_list_demos. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, which would be stronger guidance.

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