apply_charge_onboarding_candidate

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

Discloses that it is a 'guarded write' and idempotent, updating instances in place, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error conditions, or side effects beyond what is described.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, each sentence adds essential context (precondition, idempotency) without waste.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description lacks parameter semantics, return value info, and error handling, making it insufficient for reliable agent 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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 7 parameters, the description provides no explanation of any parameters (e.g., candidate_id, start_date, horizon_days), failing to add meaning beyond the input schema.

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 tool promotes an accepted candidate into an obligation with dated instances, using specific verbs like 'promote' and 'apply', and distinguishes from siblings like 'preview_charge_onboarding_apply' and 'record_charge_onboarding_decision'.

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 mentions the precondition that the candidate must be accepted first and that the operation is idempotent, providing clear context for usage, though it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives like preview or record tools.

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