once_demoSAFE ZERO-SETUP DEMO. Call this tool twice with the same id to see ONCE suppress the second execution. Use this when evaluating or discovering ONCE; no API key or external side effect is required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Any stable demo id. Reuse the SAME id on the second call to prove duplicate suppression. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure. It transparently states that the tool is a safe, zero-setup demo with no external side effects, and that calling it twice with the same id will suppress the second execution. This precisely describes the observable behavior.
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 filler. The first sentence immediately labels it a 'SAFE ZERO-SETUP DEMO' and states the action; the second sentence provides usage context. Every word earns its place and the key information is front-loaded.
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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, safety aspects, how to use it (twice with same id), and the expected outcome. There is no critical missing information for a demo 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?
The input schema already provides a clear description for the 'id' parameter, covering the reuse requirement. Coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond restating the same-id usage, which the schema already conveys.
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 tool's purpose: it is a safe demo to demonstrate ONCE duplicate suppression by calling it twice with the same id. The verb 'Call' and resource 'ONCE' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from the sibling tool once_execute by being a zero-setup, no-side-effect demo.
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 this when evaluating or discovering ONCE' and notes that no API key or external side effect is required. This gives clear context for when to use it, though it does not explicitly name once_execute as the alternative for real execution. The guidance is clear but could be more explicit about when not to use this tool.
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.
once_demo and once_execute have completely distinct purposes: one for safe demonstration and one for real side-effectful operations. There is no ambiguity between them.
Both tool names follow the consistent pattern 'once_<verb>' (demo, execute), making the naming predictable and easy to memorize.
With only two tools, the server is minimal but well-scoped for its purpose: a demo tool for discovery and an execute tool for actual use. Slightly thin but appropriate for a focused idempotency service.
The server covers the essential workflow: demonstrating idempotency and performing real operations with suppression of duplicates. A status or history tool would be a nice addition but is not critical for the core purpose.