ghl_estimate_generate_number

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, conveying safe, idempotent read behavior. Description adds endpoint URL and OAuth scopes but no further behavioral details (e.g., generation logic, concurrency).

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?

Description is relatively concise (4 lines) but includes technical details like version header and source file that may not be essential for an agent. Could be streamlined.

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 the simple nature (2 params, no output schema) and good annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and scopes. However, it lacks information about the generated number format, prerequisites (e.g., location existence), and any error conditions.

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 50%: altId has a description in the schema, altType does not. The description adds no parameter information beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the missing altType description.

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?

Clear verb 'Get' and specific resource 'next estimate number for the given location'. Unambiguously distinguishes from siblings like ghl_invoice_generate_number for invoices and other estimate operations.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives such as ghl_estimate_create or ghl_invoice_generate_number. The context is implied by the name but not stated.

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