sentinel_risk_report

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'cross-chain' scope but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: whether this is expensive/computationally heavy, synchronous vs async, cached vs real-time computation, or if it requires prior data collection. 'AI risk' is vague regarding whether it analyzes AI models or uses AI to analyze risk.

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?

Single efficient sentence (12 words) with front-loaded action verb. Zero redundancy or filler. Each phrase adds specific value ('comprehensive', 'cross-chain', 'anomaly analysis') without waste.

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?

For a complex analytical tool implied by 'AI' and 'cross-chain', the description is minimally adequate given zero parameters and no output schema. However, lacks detail on return format, data freshness, or what 'AI risk' specifically encompasses in this domain. Adequate but with clear gaps for a sophisticated reporting tool.

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?

Zero parameters present, meeting the baseline score of 4 per rubric. Schema is empty object with 100% coverage trivially satisfied. No parameters require semantic clarification beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('AI risk report') with detailed components listed (cross-chain health, anomaly analysis, recommendations). Distinguishes from siblings like sentinel_scan or sentinel_chain by emphasizing comprehensive reporting and AI-specific risk analysis, though could explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like sentinel_scan or sentinel_chain, nor any prerequisites (e.g., whether specific chains must be monitored first). Purely descriptive of functionality without contextual selection criteria.

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