host_add

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the tool 'save's configuration but does not clarify if it overwrites existing aliases, persists across sessions, or requires any prior setup. Lacks important behavioral details.

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?

Single sentence, 12 words, front-loaded with the core purpose. No unnecessary information. Efficiently conveys the tool's function.

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?

Despite having 7 parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain return values, error handling, or behavior on duplicate aliases. Incomplete for a configuration-saving 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 baseline is 3. The description briefly mentions some parameters (alias, host, user, password/key) but does not add meaning beyond the schema. No improvement.

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?

Clearly states the action ('save'), the resource ('host configuration'), and the key fields (alias, host, user, password/key). Distinguishes from sibling tools like host_list and host_remove by focusing on saving configuration for reuse.

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?

Implies usage scenario ('for quick reuse') but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor mentions alternatives. For a simple tool, this is adequate but not explicit.

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