self_critique

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it scores on 6 axes, returns 1-5 per axis plus a summary, and triggers a revision pass if any score <3. This covers key behavior, though the mechanics of the 'revision pass' are ambiguous.

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 with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the core action ('Score output on 6 quality axes') and includes all necessary information without fluff.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it specifies output format (1-5 per axis, summary) and a condition for revision. It could clarify the revision trigger's automation level, but overall adequate.

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 100% for the single 'content' parameter with a basic description. The tool description adds value by explaining that the content is scored on 6 quality axes, going beyond the schema's minimal 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?

The description clearly states the tool scores output on 6 named quality axes (Philosophy, Hierarchy, Execution, Specificity, Restraint, Variety) before shipping, returning scores and triggering revision. The verb 'score' and resource 'output on 6 axes' are specific, and no sibling tool duplicates this function.

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 includes 'before shipping' as a temporal clue but does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool or suggest alternatives. Usage context is implied but not fully directive.

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