Save Auto-Booking Rule

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Save or update' is consistent. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, but does imply it operates on a single rule (not batch), which is a minor addition.

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, no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second sentence provides usage guidance. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

No output schema exists, but the tool is relatively simple (save/update a rule). The description does not explain return values or error states. Given the 9 parameters (mostly optional) and no output schema, a bit more context about what the response contains would improve completeness.

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 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Save or update') and the resource ('one stable counterparty auto-booking default'). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'suggest_booking' which are for suggesting rather than persisting rules.

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?

Provides explicit precondition: 'Use only after the treatment has been confirmed and approved.' While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, the context and sibling list imply it's for finalized auto-booking rules. A clear when-to-use statement is present.

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