release_place

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

Annotations already mark it as destructive, but the description adds valuable context: it verifies current holder by default and allows unconditional release with kick. This goes beyond the basic destructive hint without contradicting it.

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, front-loaded with the main action, and the second sentence adds the only necessary behavioral nuance. No wasted words.

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, the presence of an output schema, and annotations, the description covers the essential action and parameters. It could mention error conditions or the inverse relationship with acquire_place, but it is complete enough for confident use.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does: 'by name' clarifies the 'name' parameter, and 'kick=True' explains the 'kick' boolean. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 specific action 'Release a place by name', which is a distinctive verb+resource combination. It differentiates from siblings like acquire_place (opposite) and release_from (different release target) by focusing on releasing a place itself.

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?

It provides clear context on when to use the default behavior vs kick=True (force release regardless of holder). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like release_from or when not to use this tool, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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