decline_trade

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

With no annotations, description effectively discloses the two-step confirmation behavior. Could be improved by noting that the action is irreversible after confirmation, but the preview pattern is well explained.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences covering purpose and usage pattern without any fluff. Every word adds value.

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 the output schema exists and parameters are well-documented in the schema, the description is sufficiently complete. The confirmation pattern is a key behavioral detail not captured elsewhere.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond confirming the confirm parameter's role. Baseline score of 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?

Clearly specifies the action (decline) and resource (trade offer). Distinguishes from siblings like accept_trade and cancel_trade by focusing on declining incoming offers.

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?

Explains the confirmation pattern (preview vs execute) and that it's for trade offers from another team. Does not explicitly list when not to use or name siblings as alternatives, but the context provides sufficient clarity.

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