tokportal_add_edit_slots

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

Annotations indicate this is not read-only, idempotent, or destructive, but give no further hints. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether adding slots can fail, what state changes occur, or if it requires certain permissions. It adds minimal value beyond the annotations, which already show it's a mutation.

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 conveys the core action without fluff. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose, though it could benefit from a bit more context 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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns or what success looks like. It does not. Additionally, the tool has nested objects and three parameters, but the description doesn't help the agent understand the action's scope or behavior, leaving significant gaps for a mutation 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning to parameters like 'id', 'quantity', or 'idempotency_key' beyond their names and types. For example, it doesn't explain what 'edit slots' are or the effect of the quantity on the bundle.

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 'Add edit slots to a bundle' clarifies the verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like tokportal_add_video_slots. However, it lacks specificity about what 'edit slots' are or how they relate to bundles, making the purpose somewhat vague for an agent unfamiliar with the domain.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tokportal_add_video_slots or tokportal_create_bundle. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and description, with no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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