confirm_ai_call

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that the tool reuses the original payment and returns a call_id for polling. However, it does not mention whether it is a read or write operation or what happens on failure, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 concise sentences cover action, prerequisite, payment implication, and return value with no wasted words. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose.

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?

The description explains the prerequisite, payment reuse, and return value for polling, which is sufficient given the tool's simplicity. It lacks details on error handling or alternative flows, but these are not critical.

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 description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema. It repeats the sessionId and answers descriptions but does not introduce new parameter details.

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 confirms an AI call after reviewing push-back questions, specifying the resource (AI call) and verb (confirm). It distinguishes from sibling ai_call by indicating it is used when state='pending_confirm'.

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 provides explicit context for when to use (when ai_call returns pending_confirm) and notes that no new payment is needed. It also mentions polling with check_job_status, but does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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