Send signing reminder

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

Annotations indicate this tool is not read-only, not destructive, and not idempotent, which aligns with sending a reminder. The description adds no further behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, side effects) beyond what annotations already provide. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but additional context would improve transparency.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, earning its place.

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 moderate complexity (5 parameters, 1 required) and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the core action and entity type but could optionally mention that the email parameter targets specific recipients, though the schema explains this.

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%, with each parameter described in detail. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond the schema; it only contextualizes the action. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides rich param information.

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 action: sending a signing reminder to pending signers on a document or document group. It uses a specific verb ('send') and resource ('signing reminder'), and the scope distinguishes it from siblings like 'send_invite' (initial invite) and 'cancel_invite'.

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 for reminding pending signers but does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'send_invite' or 'cancel_invite'. It relies on context from the tool name and sibling list, missing explicit when-not or alternative guidance.

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