scale_presto_engine

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

No annotations provided, but description fully discloses critical behaviors: coordinator quantity fixed at 1, worker range 1-50, node types can be changed, coordinator and worker can have different types. No ambiguity.

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?

Well-structured with bullet points and sections. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, output schema present), the description covers all necessary information: purpose, constraints, ranges, requirements. No gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage, but description's Args block explains each parameter with constraints (e.g., coordinator_quantity must be 1, worker_quantity 1-18 recommended). Adds significant meaning 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?

Clearly states it scales a Presto engine by adjusting node counts in watsonx.data. The specific verb 'scale' and resource 'Presto engine' distinguish it from sibling tools like scale_prestissimo_engine and scale_spark_engine.

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 explicit guidelines: recommended node types, scaling capabilities, requirement to provide both coordinator and worker configurations. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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