List Rappi addresses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, establishing the safe read-only nature. The description adds unique behavioral information about redaction of street, phone, and email in the default privacy mode, which is not captured elsewhere and useful for output expectations.

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 filler: the primary function is front-loaded, and the redaction note adds critical detail in the second sentence. It is appropriately concise and well-structured.

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?

Since there is no output schema, a complete description should clarify the structure of returned addresses (e.g., IDs, labels) and how privacy_mode affects the response. The description only covers redaction, leaving other output aspects unspecified, so it is adequate but not fully self-sufficient.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'default privacy mode' but does not explain the enum values (summary, structured, raw) for privacy_mode or the response_format choices. This gives only a partial hint, leaving meaning mostly to the agent's inference.

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 'List saved delivery addresses', a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on creating, updating, deleting, or setting addresses. The redaction note also clarifies the output scope without ambiguity.

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 no context on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rappi_create_address or rappi_set_active_address. It only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer use cases, which is a clear gap.

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