create_gift_card

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: requires a private key (via environment variable or optional param), uses Direct Response Mode for immediate output, and creates gift cards. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what 'immediate card details' entails.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and key behavioral details (private key, Direct Response Mode). It's concise with two sentences, though the second sentence could be slightly tightened (e.g., 'Uses Direct Response Mode to return card details immediately').

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is moderately complete for a 6-param tool. It covers the action, key requirements, and output behavior, but lacks details on response format, error cases, or integration context (e.g., what UniVoucher is).

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%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., doesn't explain tokenAmount formatting or chainId implications). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Create a new UniVoucher gift card') and specifies the resource ('gift card'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_single_card or query_api_cards. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other potential creation tools (none listed), so it's not a perfect 5.

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 implies usage when creating gift cards with a crypto wallet, mentioning Direct Response Mode for immediate details. It doesn't provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives (e.g., vs. other creation methods), leaving some ambiguity.

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