resolve_proposal

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

Discloses key behavior beyond annotations: picks highest-scoring slot accepted by most participants, creates confirmed event, and cancels if all responses are 'decline'. No contradiction with annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false).

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?

Four sentences, each adding value. Front-loaded with core purpose. No unnecessary words 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?

Given the single required parameter and no output schema, the description covers behavioral outcomes, constraints, and prerequisites fully. The tool is simple but the description is 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?

Only one parameter (proposal_id) with 100% schema coverage; description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema's 'Proposal to resolve'. 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 explicitly states the verb 'Force-resolve' and the resource 'open proposal', and it distinguishes from siblings like 'respond_to_proposal' by specifying it uses collected responses without waiting for all participants.

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?

Provides clear context: 'Use when you want to close out a proposal without waiting for every participant.' Also mentions requirements: 'Requires an org-level API key. Pro plan only.' Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but the context is sufficient.

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