detect_changepoints

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the purpose but does not disclose side effects, read-only nature, or dependencies. The minimal behavioral info is the CUSUM method, but deeper context (e.g., output format, data requirements) is absent.

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 stating purpose and method. It is concise, but at the cost of omitting valuable context like usage guidance. Each word earns its place, but a second sentence could improve completeness without bloat.

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 (4 params, specific statistical method, output schema exists), the description is too sparse. It does not explain data requirements (numeric series, any length constraints) or output expectations. The output schema mitigates return-value docs, but more context is needed for correct 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 coverage is 50% (threshold and min_segment_length have descriptions). The tool description adds no parameter information beyond the schema, leaving series_id and max_changepoints fully undocumented. The description should compensate but does not.

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 detects level shifts (mean changes) using a specific method (CUSUM binary segmentation). It distinguishes from siblings like detect_anomalies (outliers) and stationarity (trend tests).

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 usage guidelines provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like trend_test or detect_anomalies, nor does it specify prerequisites (e.g., numerical series).

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