addClientArrival

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'mark arrival' without disclosing side effects, whether it's a write operation, permissions required, reversibility, or failure cases. It doesn't describe what happens in the system (e.g., arrival record created).

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, concise phrase that immediately conveys the action. No fluff or redundant information.

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?

While the operation is simple and parameters are fully documented, the lack of annotations and output schema leaves gaps about side effects, return values, and usage context. It's minimally adequate but missing important context.

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 both clientId and locationId described. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but the schema alone is sufficient, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Check in a client') and clarifies with 'mark arrival', which defines the action clearly. It is distinct from sibling tools like addClientToClass or addAppointment, though it doesn't explicitly call out those distinctions.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that this is for physical arrival at a location, prerequisites like existing client/location records, or exclude uses like class check-in. The description merely states the action.

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