Register a buyer’s intent to start a project with Parallax and get the link to finalize it. Use when a buyer wants to move forward. Does not charge or send anything on its own — it returns the exact next step and URL for the buyer to confirm.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| track | Yes | Which side of Parallax the project is for. | |
| summary | Yes | One- or two-sentence description of what the buyer wants. | |
| service_id | No | Optional service id of interest. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the behavior: registers intent, returns a URL, and does not charge. However, it does not disclose if it creates a record or whether it's idempotent, which would add completeness.
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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds behavioral constraints. It is front-loaded and efficient.
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 has 3 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is complete. It explains the return value ('link to finalize it' and 'exact next step and URL'), leaving no major gaps for an agent.
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 coverage is 100% and already describes each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 'Register', the resource 'a buyer’s intent to start a project with Parallax', and the outcome 'get the link to finalize it'. This effectively distinguishes from sibling tools (book_call, get_company_info, etc.) by specifying it's for project initiation.
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 explicitly says 'Use when a buyer wants to move forward', providing clear context. It also states what the tool does not do ('Does not charge or send anything on its own'), but does not mention specific alternatives or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: company overview, service listing, specific pricing, booking a call, and starting a project. No two tools overlap in functionality.
All tools follow a consistent 'verb_noun' pattern in snake_case (e.g., book_call, get_company_info, list_services), making tool selection predictable and intuitive.
With 5 tools, the set is well-scoped for the domain of sales and project initiation, covering the essential customer journey without unnecessary clutter.
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle from initial discovery (get_company_info, list_services, get_pricing) to conversion (book_call, start_project), with no obvious gaps.