cdek_create_intake

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions the HTTP method and parameter constraints but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, or error behavior. It is adequate but could be improved.

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?

The description is well-structured with a brief first line, usage guidelines, and a clear Args section. It is slightly verbose in repeating constraints but remains efficient and easy to parse.

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 7 parameters with only 1 required, the description covers all essential details: purpose, usage guidelines, and parameter semantics. An output schema exists, so return value documentation is not required. The description is complete for an AI agent to confidently invoke the 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining all 7 parameters: format for intake_date, the relationship between cdek_number and order_uuid, default values and time constraints for intake_time_from/to, and the purpose of comment and name. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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's action: registration of a courier pickup request via POST /v2/intakes. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cdek_get_intake, cdek_update_intake, and cdek_delete_intake by focusing on creation.

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?

It provides explicit usage constraints: recommended minimum 3-hour time range, and that at least one of cdek_number or order_uuid must be provided. It does not explicitly state when to use alternatives, but the context is clear.

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