suggest_timestep

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'Returns recommended values with caveats about bathymetry and tidal forcing,' but lacks details on computational cost, whether it uses empirical formulas or external data, and other behavioral aspects.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a bullet, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, returns values with caveats) and presence of an output schema (not shown), the description covers essentials. However, it could briefly mention that output schema explains return structure, and perhaps note it doesn't require complex inputs.

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 0%, but the description explains the single parameter 'resolution_deg' with definition and example (e.g., 0.1 for 1/10°), adding meaningful context beyond the schema that only specifies type and required.

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 suggests safe MOM6 timestep values (DT and DT_THERM) for a given grid resolution, with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like check_cfl and get_parameter_advice by focusing specifically on timestep suggestion.

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 does not explicitly say when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It implies usage for setting timesteps based on resolution, but no guidance on when not to use it or comparison with siblings like check_cfl or get_parameter_advice.

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