compare_tariff

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention whether the tool is read-only, what side effects (if any) occur, or what the output contains. The term 'replay' is vague and doesn't clarify if results are returned or stored.

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 sentence, technically concise, but lacks structure. It does not front-load the most critical information (e.g., required parameters) and omits necessary details.

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?

Despite having an output schema (indicated but not shown), the description does not leverage it to explain return values. Combined with vague purpose and missing parameter explanations, the tool definition is incomplete for an agent to confidently use.

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%, so the description should explain parameter purposes. It does not mention target_product_code, period, or fuel. These parameters are critical for tool usage, and the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 states 'Replay actual usage against another Octopus tariff', which clearly indicates the tool's function of comparing usage against a different tariff. While the verb 'replay' is somewhat ambiguous, it effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like current_tariff or list_products.

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, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The agent receives no context about optimal usage scenarios.

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