statefarm_file_claim

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the tool creates a claim and returns a claim reference number and next steps, and it scopes the covered event types. It does not mention extended side effects such as contacting an adjuster or irreversibility, but 'initiate' already signals a state-changing action.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the core action, then add scope and output information. No filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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 9-parameter schema covers all inputs and the description covers both supported claim types and the output format, an agent has enough to invoke the tool. It could add a caveat about policy validity, but this is not essential for a first call.

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 each parameter is already documented. The description adds no new parameter semantics; its mention of auto/home/theft simply restates the claim_type enum values.

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 ('Initiate') with a clear resource ('a new insurance claim with State Farm') and differentiates from siblings like claim_status by emphasizing 'new'. The supported event list further clarifies scope.

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 description clearly implies the trigger: when a user needs to file a new claim, not check an existing one. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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