postgrid_create_cheque

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool prints and mails a physical check, that amount is converted from dollars to cents internally, and that confirmed=false yields a preview while confirmed=true sends. This sufficiently exposes the key side effects and the non-committal preview mode.

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 two sentences with zero wasted words. It leads with the core purpose, then immediately provides the two most important behavioral instructions: the preview mode and the confirmed sending mode. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the essential behavioral distinction (preview vs. send) and amount handling, which is the most critical context for correct invocation. While there is no output schema and the description does not describe return values, the 100% schema coverage of all 12 parameters and the clear side-effect framing make it sufficiently complete for selection and correct calling.

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 schema already documents all 12 parameters. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema states; it restates the amount conversion and confirmed behavior that are already present in the schema. This merits the baseline score of 3.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Print and mail a MICR-encoded check via PostGrid.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like postgrid_create_letter and postgrid_create_bank_account, and the mention of MICR encoding is a unique, concrete detail.

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 clear context for how to use the tool: call without confirmed=true to preview and with confirmed=true to send. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the preview-versus-send guidance is directly actionable and covers the main behavioral choice an agent must make.

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