firestarter_approve_drop

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

The description goes far beyond the annotations by disclosing critical behavioral outcomes: the drop goes live immediately, the per-claim discount is deducted from the seller's proceeds (not Firestarter's fee), and the requesting community is notified. These details are essential for the agent to understand the consequences of the action.

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, consisting of two well-structured sentences. The first sentence states the action and effect; the second delivers an important financial warning in an attention-grabbing manner. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is thorough: it explains the source of the drop_id, the immediate effect, the financial impact, and the notification to the requester. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without ambiguity.

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 schema already provides a clear description for the single `drop_id` parameter, and the tool description reinforces that it comes from `firestarter_drop_requests`. The description does not add new parameter-specific details beyond what the schema offers, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action: approving a pending community drop request, making it go live immediately. It specifies the resource (drop requests from firestarter_drop_requests) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like reject_drop by focusing on approval.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when a pending community drop request exists and the seller wants to approve it. It also warns about the financial trade-off, which implies when not to approve (if the discount would eat into the margin). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like rejecting or canceling a drop.

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