intuit_close_packet

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

The description discloses that it routes through the domain-agent dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope, which implies it uses the current auth context. It does not explicitly describe side effects (e.g., closing a packet), but the destructiveHint annotation already signals this. The description adds some context but not deep behavioral detail.

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 concise, using two sentences to state the purpose and list parameters. It is well-structured and free of unnecessary detail.

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 description mentions the routing and scope but does not explain what the action returns. Since the tool has an output schema (per context signals), the lack of return-value explanation is acceptable, but the description could be more complete about expected outcomes.

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?

Both parameters (`message` and `inputs`) are briefly described in the description text, covering their purpose. Although the schema itself has no per-property descriptions, the description text compensates adequately.

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 'Run' and the specific action 'close_packet', making it distinct from other domain agent tools. However, it does not explain what 'closing a packet' means, so the purpose is not fully transparent.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative tools, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions. There is no reference to sibling tools or scenarios where this action is appropriate.

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