isw_airtime_recharge

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only hints at a write/high-risk operation via the confirm requirement, but does not explain success/error outcomes, authorization needs, or side effects like charges.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence adds a critical requirement. It is concise but omits necessary details.

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 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the role of each parameter, return values, or error conditions, making it difficult 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?

Schema coverage is low (43%). The description adds no parameter documentation beyond the schema itself, missing the opportunity to clarify fields like phoneNumber, transactionRef, or the extra object.

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 states 'Top up a phone number through VAS airtime', which clearly identifies the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate this from sibling tools like isw_pay_vas_bill or isw_get_airtime_epins, which could cause confusion.

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 includes 'Requires confirm: true', which provides a specific usage requirement. However, it offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context clues.

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