jamjet_approve

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

No annotations provided, so description fully discloses side effects: appends ApprovalReceived event, resumes execution if paused, records decision in audit trail. Also details return value and failure conditions, exceeding typical transparency.

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?

Description is well-structured, front-loading purpose then side effects and failures. Every sentence adds value, though slightly verbose; could be more concise without losing clarity.

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?

Despite no output schema, description details return format (JSON with execution_id and accepted: true) and covers failure cases. With 5 parameters all documented in schema and contextual usage guidance, the description is fully complete for agent use.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining that decision must be exact, comment optional, node_id correlates, tenant_id defaults, execution_id accepts formats. This extra context justifies above baseline.

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?

Description clearly states the tool submits an approval or rejection decision for a paused workflow execution. It uses specific verb 'submit' and resource description, and distinguishes from siblings by referencing related tools like jamjet_list_executions.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: when jamjet_list_executions shows 'paused' or jamjet_get_events shows ApprovalRequested. Provides context on related tools, though lacks explicit when-not-to-use.

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