Void insurance

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds that it requires 'confirm=true', which is consistent with the schema. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., idempotency, rate limits) are disclosed, but the description does not contradict annotations.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the main action and follows with the key requirement, making it easy to parse.

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 the tool has no output schema and only two parameters, the description is adequate but sparse. It could be more complete by explicitly mentioning that the action is irreversible and charges the balance, though this is covered in the schema's confirm parameter description.

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 both parameters described in the schema. The description reiterates that 'insurance_id' is the identifier and that 'confirm=true' is required, adding minimal extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 tool's purpose: 'Void a previously booked insurance by insurance_id.' It uses a specific verb ('void') and resource ('insurance'), distinguishing it from sibling void tools for freight, parcels, and pickups.

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 indicates a requirement ('Requires confirm=true') but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The context is implicit from the tool name and siblings.

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