find_transpositions

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds only that the search is "bounded" and targets convergent nodes, without explaining how depth limits, result limits, or convergence affect behavior; with annotations covering safety, this is adequate but thin.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted clauses. Its brevity is efficient, though the jargon makes it slightly less clear than it could be.

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?

This is a complex graph-search tool with an output schema and robust annotations, but the description does not explain the search behavior, how the parameters shape it, or what a "convergent graph node" means. For a tool with three entirely undocumented parameters, the description is too incomplete to guide reliable invocation.

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 must compensate for all three parameters. It vaguely implies a starting position and a bounded search, but does not explain fen, limit, or max_depth, leaving their semantics entirely undocumented.

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 gives a verb and resource ("Find bounded move paths") and hints at transpositions via "convergent graph nodes," but the phrasing is jargon-heavy and does not explicitly say this is a chess transposition search. It does not distinguish the purpose from siblings like get_position_moves or get_position_context.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of when an agent should choose this tool over the sibling tools. The agent is left to infer the appropriate context from the tool name alone.

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