Reject a prepared Hermes action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must compensate. It mentions that the external action is not executed, which hints at non-destructive behavior, but fails to disclose authorization needs, side effects, or whether the approval ID is consumed irreversibly.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded and concise. Every word is necessary.

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 simplicity and the sibling tools, the description is too brief. It fails to differentiate 'reject' from 'cancel' and does not explain the lifecycle of a prepared action. The absence of output schema and annotations amplifies the incompleteness.

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?

The only parameter, 'approvalId', is not described in the description. The schema provides a UUID format but no semantic meaning. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should add context about what the approval ID represents or where to obtain it, but it does not.

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 action: consuming a prepared approval ID without executing the external action. The title 'Reject' reinforces the purpose. It distinguishes from approve but not from cancel among siblings.

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 alternatives like 'hermes_approve' or 'hermes_cancel'. The description implies rejection, but does not specify prerequisites or exclusion criteria.

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