winner_announcement

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

Without annotations, the description discloses that this tool only drafts text and does not post ('Review before posting'), indicating a read-only behavioral trait. It adds context beyond the schema by clarifying the tool's role as a drafting step, though it doesn't specify side effects or return format explicitly.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no redundant words, and front-loads the primary purpose. Every sentence adds value without fluff.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides basic functionality (draft text from audit record) but omits details on optional parameters and return format. It is minimally complete but leaves gaps in understanding the full usage context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'audit_path' as the source from a draw's audit record, but does not clarify the purpose or format of 'contact' or 'claim_days' parameters. This partial coverage leaves significant ambiguity for two out of three parameters.

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 'Draft winner-announcement text' from a draw's audit record, specifying the verb (draft) and resource (winner-announcement text). It distinguishes from siblings like 'post_winner_reply' (which posts) and 'draw_winners' (which draws winners).

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 for drafting text before posting ('Review before posting') but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, leaving context implied rather than explicit.

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