save_discovery_answer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Save or update', but does not clarify upsert semantics, overwrite behavior, idempotency, error handling, or any side effects. The agent cannot predict what happens if the answer already exists or what the response will be.

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 with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative, so it does not fully earn a 5 for structure.

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 tool with four required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It lacks context on what constitutes a discovery answer, how question_key is derived, and what the expected return value is.

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 0% and the description provides no explanation of any parameters. None of the four required parameters are described, leaving the agent to guess the meaning of process_id, question_key, question_text, and answer_text.

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 verb 'Save or update' and the resource 'discovery answer for a business process'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like save_audit by specifying the unique concept of a discovery answer, though it does not explicitly contrast it with 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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention any conditions for use, prerequisites, or differences from sibling tools such as save_audit or create_business.

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