Activate license key

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, etc. The description adds valuable context: that verification is fully offline, that activation-by-order involves an outbound HTTPS POST, and that activation unblocks writes. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences front-load the purpose, then detail usage. Every sentence is informative without waste. The structure is clear and efficient.

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 output schema, the description covers the tool's behavior well (modes, network call, offline verification, unlocking writes). It could mention the return value or status, but it's sufficient for most use cases.

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%, and the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema. It explains the two modes (key vs. email+orderId), when to omit each parameter, and the server's behavior in mode 2. This greatly aids correct parameter selection.

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 it activates a commercial license and describes two modes. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from related siblings like license_status or request_commercial_license, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 precise guidance: 'Activate a commercial license. Two modes — provide exactly one:' followed by detailed explanations of each mode. This tells the agent exactly when and how to use the tool, including conditions for each mode.

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