order_written_release

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the key behavioral fact that human writers (Press Advantage) create content, but it does not mention costs, delivery timelines, or what happens after ordering. This is partial disclosure.

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, 24 words, front-loaded with the main action and unique value. Zero 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?

The tool has 11 parameters and no output schema, yet the description only covers the high-level ordering concept. It omits the expected result (e.g., a new release record) and workflow steps. The schema fills gaps, but the description could offer more orientation for such a complex 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?

Schema description coverage is 91% (high), so the schema already documents most parameters. The description only adds the notion of a 'brief' (likely mapping to notes), but does not materially deepen parameter understanding. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Order') and specific resource ('professionally written press release'), and clarifies that Press Advantage writers create content, distinguishing it from other release-related tools like create_release or revise_release.

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 phrase 'professionally written press release' and 'Press Advantage writers will create the content based on your brief' clearly implies this tool is for ordering writing services, distinct from self-managed release tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusions.

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