Generate Terms of Service

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly discloses that only a free 25-line preview is returned, that a documentId is generated, and that the full document requires a one-time $9.99 license with no subscription. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond a bare 'generate' statement.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence efficiently conveys the return behavior and pricing model. Every sentence contributes essential information.

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 absence of an output schema, the description does well to explain the return values: a preview and a documentId. It also addresses the paid unlock model. It could be more complete by explicitly connecting the documentId to the get_full_document sibling tool, but the current information is largely sufficient for a correct call.

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 baseline is 3 even though the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. The description does not restate or enhance the parameter definitions, but it does not need to because the schema thoroughly documents all six required fields.

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 ('Generate'), a precise resource ('Terms of Service agreement'), and the external service used ('privacypage.io'). It is distinct from sibling tools because it identifies the exact legal document type being generated.

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 usage context is implied by the document type: an agent should call this when a Terms of Service is needed. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over generate_eula, generate_privacy_policy, or other sibling tools, and no exclusions are stated.

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