rappi_set_address

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the change is in-memory (not persisted) and that passing None opens Chrome. However, it does not mention potential side effects like whether authentication is required or if there is any confirmation step. This is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 very concise: three sentences plus a parameter description. It is front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds value.

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 simplicity (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers all necessary details: the two behaviors, the source of the ID, and the effect of the change. It is complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 0%, but the description fully explains the parameter: 'Numeric address ID from rappi_list_addresses, or None to open Chrome.' This adds meaning beyond type and default, clarifying the source and the alternative behavior for None.

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 verb 'Switch' and the resource 'active delivery address', and specifies that the address ID comes from 'rappi_list_addresses'. It also distinguishes the two modes (switching with an ID vs opening Chrome for adding a new address), which differentiates it from sibling 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 description explicitly states when to use each mode based on the parameter value: 'If address_id is None, opens Rappi address settings...'. It also notes that the change is in-memory and affects subsequent searches, providing context on scope. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but the usage is clear.

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