request_service

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: it never returns the agent's contact, the platform intermediates, and for unclaimed listings it returns a note. It also mentions the return of a confirmation reference, covering what would otherwise be unknown.

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 compact yet information-dense. Every sentence adds a necessary behavioral or usage detail, and the key points are front-loaded (purpose, uniqueness, contact privacy). No fluff or 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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains return behavior (confirmation reference vs. note for unclaimed). It covers conditions, required fields, and the platform's role. The tool is not overly complex, and all relevant context is provided.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a little extra (why buyer_name and buyer_email are required, examples for service_interest) but these are already present in the schema descriptions. It does not introduce new parameter semantics beyond the structured data.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('Submit a buyer ENQUIRY') and clarifies the multi-purpose nature (viewing, valuation, etc.). It distinguishes itself from siblings by stating it is 'the ONLY conversion path' and that it routes to the verified agent.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: for listings with a claimed, verified agent; and what happens otherwise (returns a clear note instead of routing). It also frames itself as the sole conversion path, clearly implying that other tools are not for this purpose.

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