add_preferred_driver

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the key authorization constraint (Hotel Manager) and implies the driver must already be verified. However, it does not disclose side effects, idempotency, or error conditions that would be relevant for a mutation operation.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with the core action and resource, and includes the essential authorization requirement. There is no waste or redundancy.

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 covers the main action, resource, and authorization, which is adequate for a simple add operation. However, it lacks context on behavior for edge cases (e.g., driver already on list) and potential side effects, which are not covered by annotations or an output schema.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying that the driver must be 'Verified,' which augments the driver_id parameter description and informs correct usage. This extra semantic justifies a score above baseline.

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: 'Add a Verified driver to a hotel's preferred driver list.' It uses a specific verb ('Add') and identifies the resource (preferred driver list), which effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like remove_preferred_driver and get_hotel_preferred_drivers.

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 clear context by stating 'Caller must be a Hotel Manager for that hotel,' which defines the required role and permission. However, it does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, though the tool name and purpose make its use case evident.

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