escalate_ticket

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

The description transparently discloses that the default call with confirmed=false does not escalate and returns confirmation_required=True. This reveals side effects beyond the annotations, making the tool's behavior clear.

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 concise, with a separate note for the confirmation flow. It avoids unnecessary details and is well-organized, making it easy to read and understand.

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?

The description covers the purpose and the confirmation workflow, and hints at the output (confirmation_required). It does not mention potential error scenarios or the full output schema, but given the simple nature of the tool, it is sufficiently complete.

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?

The schema has no parameter descriptions, but the description explains the 'confirmed' parameter's role (preview vs. actual) and mentions 'reason'. The 'ticket_id' is self-explanatory from the name, but no format or constraints are given, slightly reducing clarity.

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 purpose: to escalate a ticket to a human agent. The verb 'escalate' and resource 'ticket' are explicit, and it is distinct from sibling tools like search, lookup, and draft.

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 provides explicit usage guidelines by explaining the confirmation workflow: first call with confirmed=false to preview, then call with confirmed=true to actually escalate. This is actionable and clarifies when to use each mode.

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