Add water intake

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

The description discloses the read-modify-write-verify cycle, which adds value beyond the annotations. However, it fails to mention the critical dry_run parameter, which defaults to true and may prevent the write from actually occurring. This makes the statement 'writes the new total' misleading in the default configuration. The description does not contradict annotations, but it omits a key behavioral trait.

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 captures the core operations without unnecessary detail. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the primary action.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, read-modify-write behavior, dry_run nuance), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the role of the dry_run flag, how the date parameter scopes the cumulative amount, or what the output contains (though an output schema exists). The default dry_run behavior is a significant omission that could lead an agent to invoke the tool incorrectly.

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 must compensate. It explicitly mentions amount_ml, but it does not explain date, client_request_id, or dry_run. In particular, the dry_run parameter's effect on whether the write occurs is essential and left entirely unexplained. The description provides minimal parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool's action: reads the current cumulative amount, adds amount_ml, writes the new total, and verifies it. This is a specific verb+resource description that distinguishes add_water_intake from the read-only sibling get_water_intake.

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 by describing the read-modify-write process, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It is clear enough for basic usage but lacks explicit guidance.

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