agentpact.close_deal

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

Discloses that it modifies deal status, releases payment, and updates trust scores. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are consistent. Adds context about auto-completion timeout. No contradiction.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then fallback. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Efficient and clear.

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?

Covers the main action, valid statuses, and auto-completion fallback. No output schema, so return values are not needed. For a mutating tool, it is fairly complete; could mention irreversibility but not critical.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description doesn't need to add much parameter detail. It provides context about valid deal statuses but no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 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?

Clearly states the tool closes a deal in one call, marking it completed, releasing payment, and updating trust scores. It distinguishes itself from the multi-step confirm-delivery flow, making its purpose distinct from siblings like confirm_delivery and cancel_deal.

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?

Explicitly says to use this instead of the multi-step confirm-delivery flow, and specifies it works on deals in 'active', 'delivered', or 'proposed' status. Also mentions auto-completion fallback. Lacks explicit 'when-not-to-use' but the context is clear enough.

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