get_initial_reserves

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose if the operation is read-only (likely) or any side effects, permissions, or constraints. Minimal transparency beyond the name. Score 2.

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 7-word sentence, very concise. It is front-loaded with verb and object. However, it may be too terse, missing helpful details. Score 4 for efficient structure but slight under-specification.

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?

With no output schema, the description should hint at return value. It does not. The tool is simple but the description lacks completeness for an agent to fully understand usage. Score 2 for missing details about output and any constraints.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds 'for a number of outcomes' which clarifies that num_outcomes is that number. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition, but does not specify range, integer vs float, or format. Baseline 3 due to low coverage and partial compensation.

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 the verb 'Get' and resource 'initial reserves' with a specific context 'for a number of outcomes'. It is clear but does not distinguish from other 'get_*' tools or explain what 'initial reserves' are. A score of 4 reflects clear purpose with slight vagueness.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implicitly suggests it is for retrieving initial reserves, but lacks context, prerequisites, or exclusions. Score 2 for minimal implied usage.

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