Müşteri Sorusunu Yanıtla (createAnswer)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It thoroughly discloses behavioral traits: only WAITING_FOR_ANSWER status allowed, 10-2000 character limit, forbidden word check (with rejection and state changes), and error conditions (already answered, time limit exceeded, forbidden word limit). This is comprehensive and helpful.

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 appropriately sized with 6 sentences, each providing meaningful information. It front-loads the main action and then covers constraints and consequences without redundancy. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description explains prerequisites, constraints, and error scenarios well. It could mention the return value or success indicator, but the behavioral details are sufficient for an agent to set expectations. Slight gap in describing the output format.

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%, with both parameters described in the schema. The description adds context about the forbidden word check and error handling, which enriches understanding beyond schema descriptions. However, the schema already provides adequate detail, so the added value is moderate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Müşteri sorusuna yanıt gönderir' (sends answer to customer question). The verb 'yanıt gönderir' and resource 'müşteri sorusu' are specific. The tool is distinct from sibling tools like trendyol_get_questions and trendyol_get_question_by_id, which are read operations.

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?

Description specifies that only WAITING_FOR_ANSWER questions can be answered, and directs to trendyol_get_reference_data for status values. It also mentions character limits, forbidden word restrictions, and a 3-day deadline. While it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool, the context and constraints are clear.

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