min_list

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. It states the tool finds the minimum value but does not describe how it handles edge cases (e.g., empty lists, non-numeric strings in the array), performance characteristics, or error behavior. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 and front-loaded: 'Find the minimum value in a list of numbers.' The additional domain and category tags are brief and relevant. There is no wasted verbiage, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal. It states the purpose but lacks details on parameter handling, return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances. For a tool with zero schema description coverage and no annotations, this description is insufficient to fully guide an agent without additional context or trial-and-error.

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 input schema has one parameter 'numbers' of type array with string items, and schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions. The description mentions 'a list of numbers' but does not clarify that the numbers are expected as strings in the array, nor does it explain format, constraints, or examples. It adds minimal semantic value beyond the bare 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find the minimum value in a list of numbers.' It specifies the verb ('Find'), resource ('minimum value'), and input type ('list of numbers'), making it easy to understand. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'minimum' or 'min_float', which might have similar purposes, so it doesn't achieve a perfect score.

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 includes domain and category tags ('Domain: arithmetic, Category: comparison'), which imply usage in arithmetic contexts for comparison tasks. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'minimum' or 'min_float', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. The guidance is implied but not detailed.

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