screener_decide

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the three decisions and their consequences but omits other behavioral traits such as irreversibility, side effects (e.g., notifications), or required permissions. Minimal disclosure.

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?

Two short sentences, no redundancy, highly efficient. Every word earns 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?

Adequately complete for a simple tool with 3 fully described parameters and no output schema. Explains decision meanings but could add that it applies only to conversations in screener state.

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 baseline is 3. Description does not add value beyond what the schema already provides for 'apiKey', 'convoId', and 'decision' enum. No additional parameter semantics.

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?

Clearly states the tool decides a pending screener conversation for first-time senders, enumerates the three decision options ('allow', 'reject', 'cold') and their effects. Distinct from any sibling tools as none are related to screener decisions.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it implies use for pending screener conversations, it does not provide context on prerequisites or when to choose each decision over other tools.

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