Send home

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

The annotations cover key safety aspects (not read-only, idempotent, not destructive), so the bar is lower. The description adds that this 'ends the current run,' clarifying a behavioral consequence beyond annotations. However, it doesn't detail physical movement or potential effects like interruption of cleaning, which could be useful.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action and side effect without any waste.

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 (no parameters, clear annotations), the description is nearly complete. It might benefit from a brief note on when to use this versus stopping, but for a dock command, it's adequate.

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?

With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it doesn't, which is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Send') and resource ('robot back to its dock'), making the action clear. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like matic_stop or matic_pause, which could be confused with ending operations.

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 tool's purpose implies it's used to end cleaning sessions by docking, but there's no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives such as matic_stop (which might halt without docking) or matic_pause. The parenthetical gives some context but leaves room for ambiguity.

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