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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits, but it does not. There is no mention of side effects, destructive actions, external calls, or required permissions beyond the cryptic 'POST'.

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 extremely short (five words), which is concise, but it sacrifices clarity to the point of being under-specified. It reads more like a diagram than a usable description.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is grossly incomplete. It provides no information about expected inputs, return values, or behavior, making it insufficient for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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 has three parameters (task, state, session_id) with zero description coverage. The tool description does not mention or explain any parameters, so agents receive no additional semantic information.

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 'POST stuck state → routed service' is cryptic and does not clearly state the tool's function. It hints at an HTTP POST and routing but leaves the resource and action ambiguous, failing to distinguish from sibling tools like order_service or leave_with_receipt.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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