rent

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that 'confirm must be true' and that it is billable, but does not explain the destructive behavior or what resources are affected. The 'create' wording does not contradict annotations, as creation could involve destructive side effects.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences that immediately convey the core action and key constraint. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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 is too brief for a creation tool with required parameters and an output schema. It fails to mention what the tool returns, prerequisites (e.g., plan must exist), or any side effects. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 0%, meaning the description must compensate. It only adds that 'confirm must be true', providing a constraint on the confirm parameter. The plan_id parameter receives no explanation, leaving its purpose ambiguous.

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 creates an instance from a stored plan and mentions it is billable. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'plan_rental' or 'release', 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 implies usage for creating a rental instance but provides no guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from alternatives such as 'plan_rental' or 'release'. No exclusions or context for choosing this tool.

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