Save address to address book

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

Discloses key behavioral trait that stored addresses are not automatically verified, which is not covered by annotations. Annotations already indicate idempotentHint and non-destructive, so description adds verification context. Does not mention error handling or return value details.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and immediate caveat. No redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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 13 parameters and no output schema, description covers main behavioral aspects and caveat. Might benefit from mentioning the return value (e.g., created address ID), but overall adequate with annotations providing idempotent and open-world hints.

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 77%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add per-parameter details beyond schema, but overall purpose is clear. No misinterpretation risk due to schema completeness.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Save an address' and the resource 'Lob address book', with specific purpose of reuse by ID. Distinguishes from sibling verification tools by explicitly mentioning they must be called separately for verification.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (to save an address for reuse) and when not to rely on it (not automatically verified), naming alternative verification tools. Could mention prerequisites like API configuration, but overall clear guidance.

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