bias_fairness_scan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'heuristic', 'deterministic', and 'offline', but does not explain side effects, required permissions, or output behavior. The description is insufficient for a safe understanding of the tool's operation.

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, consisting of a single sentence that conveys the core purpose. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it slightly too short to be fully effective.

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 has an output schema but no return value description, and two required parameters with no documentation, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the scan produces, how to interpret results, or any constraints on 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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds no meaning beyond the property names ('test_prompts', 'categories'). The description does not explain what these parameters are or how they should be formatted, failing to compensate 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 performs a heuristic bias/fairness scan over template prompts across given categories, and specifies it is deterministic and offline. While it distinguishes itself from other tools by its focus on bias/fairness, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like evaluate_on_synthetic or scan_data_leakage_risk.

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. It lacks context about prerequisites, appropriate scenarios, or situations where another tool would be preferred.

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