escalate_to_human

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Queue a request' without detailing what happens after queuing, whether it is synchronous, or if any confirmation is returned. The term 'Queue' hints at asynchronous handling but lacks specificity.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler words. While under-specified, the efficient structure earns a high score for conciseness.

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 tool is simple (2 params, no enums) and has an output schema, but the description omits critical usage context such as when to escalate, how priority affects queuing, and what happens to the request. The output schema may cover return values, but the description alone is incomplete.

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 description does not mention the summary or priority parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent receives no guidance on what content to include in summary or what priority values are valid.

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 uses the verb 'Queue' and identifies the resource as 'a request for a human staff member', clearly indicating the action. It is distinct from siblings like search_service_knowledge and collect_intake, which serve different purposes.

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?

There is no guidance on when to escalate versus using search_service_knowledge or collect_intake. No prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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