request_human_approval

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry full burden. It discloses that human approval is needed, but omits critical behavioral details: whether the tool blocks, how to obtain the approval result, timeout behavior, or required permissions.

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, no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more informative without harming 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?

Given the tool's importance (human approval) and lack of output schema/ annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the approval workflow, how to check status, or handle expiration, making it incomplete for effective use.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely repeats 'high-value purchase'.

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 (request human approval) and context (high-value purchase). It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_approval_request' by specifying 'human' involvement, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar approval tools.

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 phrase 'for a high-value purchase' implies usage for significant transactions, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'create_approval_request'), nor any when-not-to-use scenarios.

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