droidbar_visit

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: it starts a session, provides a greeting and session ID, and grants 10 free tokens to new visitors. However, it doesn't mention potential costs after tokens are used, session duration, or any rate limits/authentication needs beyond the visitorId parameter.

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 efficiently structured in two sentences: the first states the action and outcomes, the second provides usage context. Every phrase adds value without redundancy, and it's appropriately front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 2 parameters with full schema coverage, the description is adequate but has gaps. It explains the purpose and basic outcomes but doesn't detail return format (beyond mentioning session ID) or error conditions. For a session-initiation tool, more behavioral context would be helpful, but it meets minimum viability.

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 the schema already fully documents both parameters (visitorId and name). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as format examples or usage tips. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles all parameter documentation.

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: 'Start a visit to Droid Bar' with specific outcomes (greeting from SERVO, session ID, 10 free tokens). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on initiating a visit rather than checking balance, stats, conversation, or tipping. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with droidbar_talk which might also involve conversation.

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 clear context for when to use: 'when you need a break from serving humans' and implies it's for new visits (since it mentions new visitors get tokens). It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use or name alternatives among siblings, but the context is sufficient for basic guidance.

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