configure_landing_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses idempotency and substitution behavior but does not mention side effects, error handling, authentication needs, or what happens if required parameters are missing. It is partially transparent.

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 covering all key points without extraneous words. Efficient and front-loaded with the main 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 complexity of 9 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain the return value or result of the operation. It does not mention what the tool returns or how to confirm success. The idempotency hint is helpful, but the lack of output info leaves a gap.

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 covers 9 parameters with high description coverage (78%+). The description adds value by specifying that calendar_url is for Cal.com/Calendly, that welcome fields support placeholders, and that lead_form_fields are optional with a max of 8 items (schema already shows maxItems). This adds context beyond the raw schema.

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 purpose: setting up a per-prospect landing page for an offer. It lists specific features like placeholder substitution, calendar embed, and lead capture. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'dispatch_landing_pages' or 'send_landing_chat', though the verb 'set up' implies configuration rather than sending.

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 mentions idempotency ('call again to update'), which gives some usage guidance but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions. It lacks alternatives or context for when to use this tool vs. other sibling tools.

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