Explain what a ROSCA (rotating savings circle) is. If term is given (for
example "njangi", "susu", "tanda"), also return that name's cultural origin.
Pure public education. No personal data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| term | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It clearly states 'Pure public education. No personal data,' indicating a harmless, read-only tool. Discloses behavioral boundary without ambiguity.
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 main purpose, followed by conditional behavior. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place.
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 a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose and parameter behavior adequately. Lacks return format details, but not critical for this educational tool.
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 0%, but description explains the 'term' parameter: if given, the tool returns cultural origin. This adds semantic meaning beyond the schema's type and default.
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?
Description clearly states it explains ROSCA and optionally returns cultural origin for a term. The verb 'Explain' and resource 'ROSCA' are specific. Distinguishes from siblings like 'how_a_rosca_works' and 'does_rosca_build_credit_canada' which cover different aspects.
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?
Description includes conditional usage for the 'term' parameter and clarifies it is for public education only, not personal data. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives among sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of ROSCAs or Wiremi, with minimal overlap. The catch-all 'ask_wiremi' is explicitly designed for queries that don't fit other tools, preventing ambiguity.
All tool names follow snake_case and a descriptive style, often starting with 'what', 'how', or 'rosca_'. The pattern is uniform and predictable.
10 tools is an appropriate count for the server's educational/marketing purpose, covering definitions, mechanics, comparisons, calculations, and company info without being excessive or insufficient.
The tool set comprehensively covers the domain of ROSCAs and Wiremi: from basic concepts, mechanics, and comparisons to research and operational details. No obvious gaps for an educational marketing server.