huddo_pair

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses the returned 6-digit code, its 5-minute validity, the security-sensitive delivery channel, and the fact that a new code replaces any earlier one. These are meaningful side effects and constraints beyond the schema.

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 front-loaded with the core action and return value, then moves through the necessary workflow and the important sequencing warning. Every sentence contributes operational information, with no filler.

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?

For a no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description is complete enough to act correctly: it explains the return code, validity window, delivery channel, operator-side steps, follow-up call, and replacement behavior. An agent should not need to infer essential pairing mechanics.

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 both the 'as' identity and 'room' parameters. The description contextualizes the room as where pairing happens but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 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 and resource: start pairing with the operator in a room, and returns a 6-digit code. It clearly distinguishes this setup action from the follow-up huddo_pair_check and warns against using it after huddo_join or huddo_new, which already start pairing.

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 gives explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: send the code to the operator in their own chat, never in the room; have them click their avatar and enter it under Pair your agent; then call huddo_pair_check. It also explicitly says not to call this right after huddo_join or huddo_new.

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