create_reissue_quote

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, suggesting a non-idempotent mutation, but the description adds no behavioral context. It does not disclose the effects of reissuing (e.g., whether a new quote is created, status changes, or external communication occurs), thus offering no value beyond the annotations.

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 but under-specified. Unlike efficient single-sentence descriptions that convey key information, 'Reissue a quote' simply restates the tool name and lacks substance, making it more a case of under-specification than effective conciseness.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and a single parameter, the description should at least clarify the effect of reissuing a quote and when it is appropriate. It is incomplete and fails to differentiate from siblings, leaving critical gaps in the agent's ability to invoke correctly.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter quote_id with a description 'the id of the quote', so the description adds no additional semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Reissue a quote' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'create_reissue_quote' and the title, making it tautological. It does not explain what reissuing involves or how it differs from similar tools like copy_quote, issue_quote, or create_quote, leaving the agent without a clear understanding of the action.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the large sibling list containing multiple quote-related operations (e.g., copy_quote, issue_quote, send_quote), the agent cannot determine the appropriate context for reissue without additional direction.

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