run_hydraulic_simulation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, or whether the simulation is destructive. It only lists output types, missing critical behavioral context like requiring a loaded network.

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?

The description is concise, with a clear opening sentence and a structured Args section. Every sentence adds value, though the Args section could be integrated more naturally.

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 many sibling tools and no output schema shown (though present), the description does not explain when to use this particular simulation type or how it relates to others. It lists output types but lacks context on prerequisites or alternatives.

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 description defines 'network_id' as 'Session id of the network', adding context beyond the schema's type and title. However, with 0% schema description coverage, more explicit details (e.g., format, ownership) would be helpful.

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 verb 'Run' and the resource 'hydraulic simulation', and specifies that it returns time-series results. This distinguishes it from siblings like run_quality_simulation, but not from run_full_simulation, which may be synonymous.

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 this tool versus alternatives like run_full_simulation or run_quality_simulation. It also does not mention prerequisites like loading a network, which is suggested by the sibling load_network.

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