preauth_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The word 'hold' hints at a temporary state, but it does not mention whether the pre-authorization expires, requires completion, or has side effects like fund reservation. No permissions or reversibility are discussed.

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, front-loaded sentence. Every word provides value, and there is no redundant filler.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what happens after a pre-authorization (e.g., returns an ID, holds funds for a limited time). It does not mention the relationship to sibling tools like complete_preauth, leaving the agent without a full picture of the workflow.

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% for all four parameters, so the schema already documents what each parameter means. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, but per the rubric the baseline of 3 applies when schema coverage is high.

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 'Pre-authorize (hold) an amount on a card' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like complete_preauth and refund_order. The parenthetical '(hold)' adds clarity about the nature of the action.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools suggest a payment workflow, but the description does not state whether this should be called before create_order, requires an auth token, or how it relates to complete_preauth.

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