firestarter_auto_approve_limit

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

With readOnlyHint=true already provided, the description adds valuable context: it clarifies the limit is a real stored setting (not chat or session memory), explains the auto-approval behavior, and states it applies to all future orders. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: first sentence states the purpose, then explains the behavior, scope, and how to change it. Every sentence carries useful information without redundancy or fluff.

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?

The description thoroughly explains the tool's behavior and scope, but does not explicitly state the exact return format of the limit (e.g., currency, number, string). Since there is no output schema, this slight gap is acceptable for such a simple read operation. It remains 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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema is complete. Per guidelines, 0 params is a baseline of 4. The description adds semantic meaning about what the limit represents and its implications, which further helps the agent understand the tool's purpose.

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 'Read the buyer's PERSISTENT, account-level auto-approval limit for purchases' with a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling setter tool by naming firestarter_set_auto_approve_limit as the alternative for changes.

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?

It explains when the limit matters (orders at or below limit auto-approve; above pauses), highlights it's a persistent account setting across all surfaces, and explicitly names the alternative tool for modification. This gives clear context for both use and exclusion.

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