classify_tool

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool 'returns' a label, implying a read operation, but does not mention idempotence, side effects, permissions, or rate limits. This is insufficient for an agent to understand what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 single-sentence description is concise but at the cost of meaningful information. It lacks structure and essential details, making it under-specified. Conciseness should not sacrifice necessary context.

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?

For a tool with two parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the classification label is, what inputs are expected, or what the tool accomplishes. The agent would have to guess how to use it.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any parameter. The 'action' and 'classification' parameters are completely undefined in meaning or usage, leaving the agent without guidance on how to set them.

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 'return' and resource 'classification label', but the phrase 'for a given tool classification value' is ambiguous. It is unclear what constitutes a 'tool classification value' and how it relates to the parameters 'action' and 'classification'. The purpose is partially clear but lacks specificity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any exclusions or context for selection. The description does not help an agent decide when classify_tool is appropriate.

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