product_feature_adoption

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

No annotations provided. Description only mentions routing through a dispatcher with JWT/tenant/company scope, which is generic. No disclosure of whether this is a read or write operation, side effects, or behavioral traits beyond scoping.

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?

Very concise, no filler. Two sentences plus parameter descriptions. However, brevity comes at the cost of completeness.

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?

Output schema exists, but description lacks essential context about what 'feature_adoption' does. For a domain agent action, the agent likely needs to know the purpose or outcome to decide to invoke it.

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 description must compensate. It describes 'message' as a free-text objective and 'inputs' as an optional JSON string. This adds basic meaning but does not specify expected format or content for inputs.

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 states the tool runs the 'feature_adoption' product domain agent action, but does not explain what the action does beyond its name. 'Run the product domain agent action' is a tautology relative to the tool name. The verb 'Run' is clear, but the resource is not defined meaningfully.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like product_analysis or product_chat. Does not mention prerequisites or context 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.