add_source

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but does not. It fails to mention side effects (e.g., whether the source is permanently added), prerequisites (e.g., session must exist), or failure behavior if content cannot be fetched. The word 'Add' implies mutation, but no further detail is provided.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is appropriately sized for the information it conveys, though it could be slightly more detailed without becoming verbose.

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?

For a mutation tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a one-sentence description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or the expected workflow, leaving the agent without enough context to use the tool reliably.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description carries full responsibility for explaining parameters. It mentions none of the four parameters (sessionId, url, title, fetchContent) and adds no semantic meaning beyond what the schema fields already convey.

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's action ('Add a source to a research session') and specifies the resource ('source', 'research session'). It is obvious from the name and description that this is distinct from sibling search/fetch tools, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 phrase 'after fetching its content' implies a workflow sequence, suggesting the tool should be used after fetching a page. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like fetch_page or research_session, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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