Explain action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool 'explains' a result, implying no side effects, but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or disclose any other behavioral traits like required permissions or error conditions.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, providing clear purpose and audience details without extraneous information. Every word is informative.

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 tool has 3 parameters including a nested object and an enum, but the description only covers the audience aspect. It lacks explanation for 'actionType' and 'result', which are required. No output schema exists, so the description should compensate but does not.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description only adds meaning for the 'audience' parameter by explaining each enum value. It does not explain the 'actionType' or 'result' parameters, which are required and lack additional context in the 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 explains a decision result for specific audiences, using a verb 'explains' and resource 'decision result'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'check_booking_action' or 'write_decision_event', which might also involve explanations.

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 implies usage by describing audience types (golfer, operator, developer), but it does not provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidelines relative to siblings. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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