probe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose behavioral traits: hints escalate weakest-first, and the workflow involves speaking the probe and recollecting the answer. However, it does not disclose what happens when probes are exhausted (e.g., returns a special value, error, or nothing) nor does it explicitly state the absence of side effects or permissions needed.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. The usage tip and exhaustion guidance are integrated without redundancy or extraneous detail. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema present, the description sufficiently covers purpose, workflow, and termination condition. The only minor gap is the exact behavior when probes run out, but an output schema likely covers return values, so this is acceptable.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing to add beyond the empty schema, and the description properly focuses on behavior rather than nonexistent parameter details.

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's function: 'Get the next hint for the current question, escalating weakest-first.' This is a specific verb ('get') plus resource ('next hint for current question') with a distinctive behavior ('escalating weakest-first') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like next_question or reveal_model_answer.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Speak the probe with say, then collect_answer again.' It also gives an exclusion: 'When probes run out... give the answer and move on.' However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool to use when probes are exhausted, such as reveal_model_answer, so it stops short of full alternative comparison.

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