sign_contract

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

The description discloses that v1 returns a deep link instead of signing headlessly, which adds behavioral context beyond the annotations. The 'destructiveHint: true' annotation is consistent with signing a contract, and the description provides specific version behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is stated first, followed by a critical behavioral note and a requirement. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 mentions the tool returns a deep link, which is sufficient for basic understanding. It covers the essential behavioral trait (headless vs. deep link) and the confirm requirement. Missing details on error handling or return format but acceptable for a simple tool.

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%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by emphasizing the 'confirm' parameter requirement and the optional nature of 'origin', which goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 signs a contract received from a vendor, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'pay_invoice' and 'list_workspace_files' by focusing on signing contracts.

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 requires 'confirm:true' and notes that the 'origin' parameter is optional when only one session is active. It provides clear context for usage, though it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives.

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