escrow__release_escrow

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses exactly-once semantics, idempotency, and that repeat calls return existing record. Could mention authorization or side effects but does what's needed.

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?

Single sentence with parenthetical detail, no wasted words. Immediately provides category context.

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?

Lacks output schema, and no explanation for delivery_proof parameter. Adequate for the core behavior but incomplete for a full agent decision.

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 0%, but description only explains escrow_id implicitly. The optional delivery_proof parameter is not mentioned at all, leaving the agent uninformed about its purpose.

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: release escrow to payee, with specific status conditions (FUNDED/DISPUTED). It distinguishes from siblings like refund_escrow and fund_escrow by specifying the target state.

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 mentions when to use (escrow must be funded or disputed) and implies release is the right action. Lacks explicit alternatives compared to refund or dispute, but the condition is clear.

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