Air quickstart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about personalization based on current agent/env state, but doesn't disclose any further behavioral details like response shape or side effects, which is acceptable given the annotation coverage.

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 short sentences, each earning its place: the first defines the outcome, the second defines the trigger condition. No redundancy or filler.

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 simple quickstart tool with two optional enum parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core function and usage cue. However, it omits guidance on the client parameter and what the 3 steps might look like, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding how to invoke it 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 only 50%: privacy_mode has a description in the schema, but client has none. The tool description does not explain what client should be set to or how it affects the walkthrough. The enums are listed but their use cases are not elaborated, leaving a gap that the description fails to fill.

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 states a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('personalized 3-step setup walkthrough'), and ties it to a clear user intent ('how do I use this?'). It is distinguishable from generic help tools, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling air_onboarding or air_demo.

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 gives a clear when-to-use trigger ('Call this first when the user asks...') and implies priority ('first'). It does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the provided context is actionable enough.

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