post_addresses

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and destructiveHint=false. Description adds permission requirement and HTTP endpoint, but no details about response format, idempotency, or whether it creates a new resource versus upsert. Minimal added value.

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?

Single sentence conveying purpose and permission. Extremely concise, but lacks structure (e.g., bullet points) that could improve readability. Still efficient.

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?

With 11 parameters (6 required) and no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., created address ID) and any validation rules. It only covers purpose and permission, leaving agents to guess response behavior.

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 already defines each parameter well. Description adds no additional parameter-level information, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create address', which matches the POST verb. It distinguishes from siblings like get_addresses (read) and put_addresses_by_address_reference_id (update), but does not explicitly compare alternatives.

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 put_addresses_by_address_reference_id (for updates) or get_addresses (for retrieval). Only mentions required permission, which indirectly restricts usage but doesn't provide decision criteria.

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