accept_delegation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses that the tool returns a Bearer token and that the token comes from an invite link. However, it does not mention any side effects, auth prerequisites, or error conditions.

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 sentences, direct and front-loaded. No superfluous information.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, token source, and return value. It does not address potential failure modes or authentication requirements, but is otherwise complete for selection and invocation.

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% for the token parameter, but the description adds meaning by specifying the token comes from an invite link, which goes beyond the schema's 'Invite token.' description.

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 action (accept), the object (delegation invite), and the required input (token from invite link), distinguishing it from sibling delegation tools like delegate_service and revoke_delegation.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: when you have a delegation invite token. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling context makes it obvious this is the accept action, not create or revoke.

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