summarize_docking

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

Discloses core behavior: parsing, ranking, sorting by score (lower better). No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. Could mention error handling for missing files, but overall clear.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundant information. Front-loaded with core function.

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?

Adequate but lacks parameter descriptions and explanation of 'key terms'. Return value mentioned (ranked table), but no details on structure. For a simple tool, somewhat incomplete.

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 description does not explain pose_file or top_n parameters beyond what schema provides (title, default). Needs to specify expected file format or meaning of top_n.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Parse' and resource 'Glide pose-viewer file' and mentions output format. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like analyze_interactions, which may also analyze docking results.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied by the tool's function (need a pose-viewer file), but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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