domain_summary_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It details the return structure (total_count, state_distribution, examples, common_attributes) and provides examples, disclosing the tool's read-only nature. It does not mention any side effects, permissions, or rate limits, but the disclosed behavior is sufficient for correct use.

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 well-structured with clear sections: main purpose, Args, Returns, Examples, Best Practices. Each sentence adds value without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a 2-parameter tool.

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 low complexity, existence of output schema, and complete description of purpose, parameters, return values, and usage guidance, the tool is fully documented. No gaps remain for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 fully compensates. It explains 'domain' with examples (e.g., 'light', 'switch') and 'example_limit' with meaning ('Maximum number of examples to include for each state') and default. Every parameter is clearly described.

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 'Get a summary of entities in a specific domain', specifying the verb and resource. Examples further clarify the scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_entities or search_entities_tool by focusing on aggregation rather than listing.

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 a 'Best Practices' section explicitly advising to use this tool before retrieving all entities in a domain to understand what's available. This provides clear context but does not mention when not to use or alternatives beyond the implicit suggestion.

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