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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it discloses nothing: no cost, no auth requirements, no input format expectations, no error behavior. The agent knows only the tool's name.

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 words that duplicate the name and title; this is under-specification masquerading as brevity rather than efficient front-loading of useful content.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and a description that is only a name, an agent has essentially nothing beyond the parameter label. For a tool that must communicate what 'values' should contain to compute kurtosis, this is inadequate.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single 'values' parameter ('Values to process'), so the baseline of 3 applies even though the description adds no parameter meaning. The schema is thin, but the rule sets the default here.

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 is simply the name restated twice ('Kurtosis Sample: Kurtosis Sample'), which is a tautology with no verb or resource explained. An agent cannot determine from this text what statistical operation is performed (sample kurtosis of a numeric series?) or what it returns.

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 indication of when to use this tool, when not to, or which of the hundreds of sibling tools it competes with. No context whatsoever is provided.

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