zendesk_apply_macro

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses side effects (applies field changes, posts comment) and return structure (JSON with specific fields). Good transparency for a mutation tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by action details and return format. No unnecessary words, highly 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?

Covers key aspects: what it does, how it works (steps), and what it returns. Lacks mention of error conditions, prerequisites, or edge cases, but reasonable given existence of output schema and moderate complexity.

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%, and description does not elaborate on the parameters beyond their names (ticket_id, macro_id). No added meaning or constraints beyond what schema provides. Baseline should be higher but description fails to compensate.

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?

Clearly states the action (apply a macro), the resource (Zendesk ticket), and the steps (fetch preview, apply changes, post comment). Differentiated from sibling 'zendesk_preview_macro' which only previews.

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?

Implies use when wanting to apply a macro to a ticket, but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool vs alternatives like preview_macro or other ticket update tools. No exclusion or alternative guidance.

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