sb_api_call

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

Annotations already signal non-read-only/open/destructive behavior; the description adds meaningful specifics: dry-run default that sends nothing and shows the request, pick/max_items transformations, and a 60 KB list truncation that announces itself. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then compactly covers defaults and guardrails. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is redundant.

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?

For an open-world API executor with no output schema, the description covers the essential safety default and list behavior, and references the source of ids. It does not describe response/error behavior, but this is a modest omission given the open-world nature.

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 only 29%; the description explains pick, max_items, and dry_run, and shows the id format by example. However, body, query, and path_params are not semantically described beyond their raw object/string types, so the low-coverage gap is only partially compensated.

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?

States a specific verb-resource pair ('Execute one operation from sb_api_find') and clearly distinguishes it from the discovery tool sb_api_find. The id format example reinforces what operation means.

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 makes clear the operation comes from sb_api_find, so the intended workflow is find-then-execute. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the source reference and dry-run default provide clear context.

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