postpone_scheduled_charge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool clears pending dunning and triggers a fresh reminder on the new date, which are behavioral side effects. It does not mention authorization requirements or reversibility, but the disclosed actions are relevant.

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 two sentences, front-loads the primary action, and contains no fluff. Every sentence adds value: one for the core operation and one for behavioral context.

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 no output schema and three parameters. The description covers the allowed input statuses and a side effect (dunning clear). It lacks information about return values or error handling, but for a simple mutation tool, it is reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with descriptions for all three parameters (id, reason, newDueDate). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 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 clearly states the verb 'postpone' and the resource 'scheduled charge' to a new due date. It explicitly lists allowed statuses (scheduled, due_today, overdue, paused), distinguishing it from sibling tools like pause, resume, mark_paid, etc.

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 specifies when this tool is applicable (allowed statuses) and mentions it clears pending dunning, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide direct alternatives. However, the siblings list gives implicit guidance.

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