greet

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions the formal parameter affects politeness, but does not disclose any other behaviors or side effects. For a simple greeting tool, this is acceptable but minimal.

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?

Extremely concise: two short clauses with no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The description is brief but covers the basic purpose and parameter semantics. Since an output schema exists, return value details may be there. However, for a tool with no annotations and low schema coverage, more context could be helpful (e.g., the form of the greeting).

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning: name is the person to greet, formal controls politeness. This compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 clearly states it builds a greeting for a name. It distinguishes from the sibling 'add' which likely does addition. However, it could be more explicit about the exact output (e.g., a string greeting).

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The sibling 'add' is mentioned but no comparison. No prerequisites or context provided.

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