File previewed tickets

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

Adds rich behavior beyond the annotations: a human confirmation form gates the write, nothing the caller passes can confirm it, filing requires a preview under 10 minutes old and unchanged problems, refusals occur otherwise, and previews are single-use. It also scopes side effects ('Touches no browser') and return content, which the readOnly/openWorld annotations alone could not convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its dependency, then the consent gate and failure modes. Nearly every sentence carries a distinct constraint, though the middle block is dense enough that an agent must parse several conditions in one clause chain.

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?

For a non-idempotent write gated on human consent, the definition covers prerequisites, freshness, refusal behavior, single-use semantics, and return value ('each filed ticket's link'), which complements the existing output schema. Nothing needed to invoke it safely is missing.

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% and the single previewId is documented there, so the schema carries the baseline. The description still adds meaning the schema lacks: that the id must come from scout_ticket_preview, that it is consumed once, and that it expires after 10 minutes.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('File the tickets a preview from scout_ticket_preview listed') and explicitly ties itself to the sibling that produces its input, so an agent can distinguish it from scout_ticket_preview, scout_tickets, or scout_ticket_status without reading schemas.

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?

States exactly when to call (after a preview lists tickets), what the agent may and may not do ('You may make this call; you cannot answer the form'), and the negative cases where it must never be called again ('turns the form down or closes it, or this client cannot show forms'). The alternative path ('a new preview is needed') is named explicitly.

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