BasedAgents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds value by stating 'Includes all fields needed for independent verification' and 'No auth required,' which clarifies output scope and authentication needs. However, it lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or response format, leaving gaps for a read operation.

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?

The description is highly concise and front-loaded, consisting of two efficient sentences that directly convey key information without waste. Each sentence adds value: the first states the purpose, and the second provides behavioral 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers purpose and some behavioral aspects but lacks output details, error handling, and sibling differentiation, making it minimally viable for a read tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents the single parameter 'task_id.' The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as format examples or constraints, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Get') and resource ('delivery receipt for a task'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_task' or 'check_messages', which might also retrieve task-related information, so it misses full sibling distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'No auth required,' which is a prerequisite, but doesn't specify scenarios or exclusions relative to siblings like 'get_task' or 'check_messages' for task verification.

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