FreelanceOS

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description confirms write behavior with 'persist it to the database.' However, it does not clarify the idempotentHint=false (whether duplicates are created on retry) or what success/failure looks like. Complements but doesn't significantly extend annotation coverage.

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 well-structured sentences with zero redundancy: first defines the action and captured data, second specifies the trigger condition. Every word earns its place; appropriately front-loaded with the core verb.

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?

Given the 7 parameters with full schema documentation and behavioral annotations, the description provides sufficient context for invocation. Minor gap: does not describe return values (presumably the created record ID), which would be helpful since no output schema exists.

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 100%, establishing baseline 3. The description maps conceptual terms (deliverables, pricing, expiry) to schema fields (content, amount/currency, valid_until) but does not add syntactic details or validation rules beyond the comprehensive schema.

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 'stores a new proposal' with specific details (title, deliverables, pricing, expiry), distinguishing it from sibling operations like update or accept. The verb 'store' slightly less precise than 'create', but 'new proposal' effectively signals this is for initial creation.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when the freelancer has drafted proposal content and wants to persist it to the database.' This contextualizes the tool for the agent. Could be improved by explicitly contrasting with proposals.records.update for existing records.

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