Send a one-time password (OTP) to the user's email so they can verify their identity before starting a conversation with a tradesperson. Call this first, then call start_conversation with the OTP the user receives.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | The homeowner's email address |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided. The description discloses the action (send email OTP) and purpose (verify identity before conversation). It lacks details on potential side effects like rate limits or expiration, but for a simple tool it is adequate.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and purpose, the second gives usage guidance. 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?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and usage. Could mention possible errors or response, but it is largely complete.
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 a clear description for the email parameter. The description does not add new semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 'Send' and the resource 'one-time password to the user's email'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly stating it should be called before start_conversation.
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 provides explicit ordering guidance: 'Call this first, then call start_conversation with the OTP the user receives.' It does not mention when not to use, but the context is clear.
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 targets a distinct action: project creation, profile retrieval, OTP request, tradesperson search, and conversation initiation. No two tools have overlapping purposes, ensuring clear agent selection.
Tools generally follow verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_project, search_tradespeople). Minor inconsistency: 'tradesperson_profile' uses singular while 'tradespeople' uses plural, but overall pattern is consistent and readable.
With 5 tools covering project creation, search, profiles, and chat, the set is well-scoped for a homeowner-tradesperson matching server. Each tool serves a clear role without redundancy.
Core workflow is covered (create project, search, start conversation), but notable gaps exist: no tools for updating/deleting projects, viewing bids, or managing conversations. Agents may face dead ends.
