valj_offertVäljer vinnande offert på en offertförfrågan (id från las_offertforfragan). Vald → accepterad och företaget får kundens kontaktuppgifter; övriga avböjs vänligt och förfrågan stängs. Idempotent.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | Yes | Förfrågningstoken. | |
| offert_id | Yes | Offertens id (från las_offertforfragan). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: acceptance of the winning quote, polite declination of others, closure of the request, and idempotency. This is transparent for a mutation tool, though it does not cover permissions or side effects beyond what is stated.
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 concise yet complete, consisting of one compound sentence and a fragment. It conveys the purpose, behavior, and idempotency without unnecessary words, following a logical structure that front-loads the primary action.
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 only 2 parameters, no output schema, and simple behavior, the description fully explains the selection process, effects, and idempotency. It is complete for an agent to understand what the tool does and when to invoke it.
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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by specifying that 'offert_id' comes from 'las_offertforfragan'. The schema already adequately defines the parameters, so the description provides marginal extra meaning.
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 'Väljer' (selects) and the resource 'offert' within the context of a 'offertförfrågan' (quote request). This distinctly identifies the tool's purpose and differentiates it from siblings like 'skapa_offertforfragan' (create request) and 'las_offertforfragan' (read requests).
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 explains when to use the tool (after receiving quotes, to select a winner) and describes the consequences (selected quote accepted, others declined, request closed). It implies usage context but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools; however, the sibling names provide sufficient distinction.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but avropa_tjanst and skapa_offertforfragan overlap in sending requests, with the difference being specific vs. general targeting. lediga_tider is somewhat redundant as it merely explains the paused booking and directs to other tools.
The majority follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., sok_tjanster, las_foretag, skapa_offertforfragan), but lediga_tider deviates as a noun phrase rather than an action. Swedish naming is consistent in style, though las and tjanst are reused in multiple contexts.
Eight tools is well-scoped for a service mediation platform, covering search, details, requests, and quote management without feeling bloated or sparse.
Core workflows for requesting a specific service or a general quote are covered with create/read/select actions. Minor gaps include no way to track a direct avropa_tjanst request and the paused direct booking creates a dead end, but the tool descriptions guide workarounds.