Draft pickup/delivery arrangement

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the non-mutating safety profile is covered. The description reinforces this with 'Draft only' and adds that the output includes safety tips, which is mild extra context, but it says nothing about idempotency, permissions, or what the drafted output looks like.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler and the core action stated first. It is efficient, though arguably too terse given the tool's parameter surface.

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?

With 7 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description should carry substantially more. It omits required listingId, the buyer field, and any return-format notes, so an agent lacks what it needs to invoke the tool confidently.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full parameter burden, yet it names only place, time, price, and mode-like concepts. It omits listingId (a required parameter), buyer, and fee entirely, leaving required inputs undocumented in both schema and prose.

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 names a specific verb (Draft) and resource (a pickup or delivery confirmation message) and enumerates the content it covers (place, time, price, payment). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the close sibling draft_buyer_reply, though 'Draft only' signals it is a draft-generation tool.

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 clause 'Draft only' implies the tool stops at drafting and that a separate action (e.g., send_dm) is needed to dispatch, which is useful implied guidance. However, it never states when to choose this over siblings like draft_buyer_reply or propose_deal, leaving the routing decision to inference.

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