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

Adds rich behavioral context beyond annotations: files are stored but NOT processed until owner approves by email, no account needed, and the returned park_ref should be reused as batch_ref. Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and non-destructive; the description earns its keep by explaining the parked/approval semantics.

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?

Front-loads the key insight (no account, parked batch) and then provides a concise workflow example. The example is dense but each element maps to a distinct sibling tool; no filler sentences. Slightly longer than strictly necessary but well structured.

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 zero-param orchestration starter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavioral quirks (parking, email approval), return value semantics, and the full downstream call sequence. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline 4 applies. The description also clarifies the return value park_ref which is used downstream as batch_ref, adding useful semantic linkage even though there are no inputs to describe.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'start a PARKED file batch' with the key twist 'send the site now, authenticate after.' Distinguishes itself clearly from siblings like yetty_batch_file and yetty_batch_end by naming it as the entry point of the batch flow.

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?

Explicitly positions this as the first step for users with no account, then walks the full sequence of subsequent tool calls. The full workflow example is essentially a when-to-use guide that routes an agent through yetty_batch_file, yetty_batch_end, yetty_signup, and yetty_claim_status.

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