确认预约摘要

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'user confirms before submission' but does not explain what happens when confirm is true vs false, nor any side effects like state changes or required permissions.

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 concise sentence with no extraneous information. It is efficiently structured and front-loaded with the key purpose.

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 has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits return value details, parameter explanations, and behavioral context, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of the parameters (flowId and confirm). The agent receives no guidance on how to use these parameters correctly, significantly hindering tool invocation.

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 returns the final registration summary and requires user confirmation before submission. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like appointment_submit by its role in the confirmation workflow.

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 usage context: it should be used to present a summary and obtain user confirmation before proceeding to submit. While it provides clear context, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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