get_reminder_suggestion

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 'auto-detects level and fees' which adds some behavioral detail, but it does not clarify whether this is a read-only operation, what the returned suggestion contains, or what 'level' and 'fees' refer to. It does not disclose any side effects or permissions.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action, no redundant wording. Efficient 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is underspecified. It does not explain what the suggested reminder looks like (text? object?), what the 'level' and 'fees' auto-detection produces, or any potential side effects. An agent may invoke it correctly but lacks context on the expected outcome.

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?

The input schema provides full description for invoice_id ('The overdue invoice UUID'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no parameter-specific details beyond reinforcing the invoice context, so the schema already handles the semantics. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'suggested reminder' and scopes it to 'overdue invoice', also noting auto-detection of level and fees. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_reminder or create_reminder.

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 a contextual use case ('for an overdue invoice') but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_reminder or list_reminders, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the invoice being overdue. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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