tokportal_create_account_edit_request

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

The description richly discloses behaviors not covered by annotations: atomicity of assignment/debit/task creation, credit cost (8 credits), manager routing logic, eligibility rules for completed bundles, and that an unavailable manager never costs credits. This far exceeds the minimal annotation set.

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 six sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence adds value (credit cost, prerequisites, routing, atomicity, task placement). It is concise but slightly dense, losing a point for minor readability overhead.

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, yet the description does not explicitly state the response structure (e.g., returns task ID or success status). While it explains side effects and atomicity, the absence of return value information leaves the agent partially in the dark about what to expect after invocation.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions (e.g., 'Saved account ID', 'JSON request body'). The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with 'Request profile edits for a delivered account', a specific verb+resource statement. It further clarifies the action by noting it debits 8 credits and creates a task, effectively distinguishing it from sibling read tools like tokportal_get_account_edit_request.

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 mentions required prerequisites ('Active TokPortal Coverage and a routable active account manager') but does not contrast this tool with alternatives. It implies use for profile edits but provides no when-not-to-use guidance or explicit sibling differentiation beyond the name.

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