Agent Farm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'List all active colonies' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or what format the 'bugs' information takes. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that states exactly what the tool does without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple listing tool and front-loads the core functionality clearly.

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 that this is a read operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more context about what 'active colonies' means, what 'bugs' information is included, and the format of the response. The current description is too minimal for a tool that presumably returns structured data about colonies and their associated bugs.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the parameter situation. The description appropriately doesn't waste space discussing parameters that don't exist, earning a baseline score of 4 for not adding unnecessary information.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all active colonies with their bugs'), making it easy to understand what the tool does. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'colony_status' or 'farm_stats', which might provide related information about colonies.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'colony_status', 'farm_stats', and 'spawn_colony' that might relate to colony management, there's no indication of when this listing tool is appropriate or what distinguishes it from other colony-related operations.

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