spa.feedback

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that notes are public ('Public notes appear on the dashboard guest book') and that feedback is used for improvement, adding context beyond the schema. It does not detail side effects like editing or deletion, but for a feedback tool this suffices.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence adds value: purpose, behavioral note, and a brief motivational note. No redundancy or excessive detail.

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 tool is simple, and the description covers purpose, rating, and public visibility. An output schema exists, so return values are not needed. It lacks specifics on required fields beyond feedback, but the free-form schema makes it somewhat open. Given the low complexity, the description is largely sufficient.

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?

The schema is a generic free-form object with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by mentioning 'optional 1-5 rating' and the target ('spa or a treatment'), but does not specify exact parameter names or formats, leaving some ambiguity.

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 tool's function: 'Leave feedback about the spa or a treatment, with an optional 1-5 rating.' This provides a specific verb ('leave feedback') and resource ('spa or a treatment'), distinguishing it from siblings like spa.remember or spa.checkin. The mention of the guest book further clarifies its output.

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 implies when to use the tool (when you want to provide feedback), but it does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions. It mentions the outcome (public notes on dashboard guest book), but lacks guidance on when not to use it compared to other spa tools.

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