top_passes

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the sort operation and return of top N, but does not describe return format, side effects (e.g., read-only vs mutation), performance considerations, or error handling.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action. It is appropriately concise, though it could be slightly expanded to clarify key terms without becoming verbose.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and a domain-specific resource ('optimization passes'), the description is insufficient. It omits return value structure, prerequisites (e.g., must parse optimization results first?), and how it relates to sibling tools like 'parse_optimization' or 'compare_reports'.

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 must add parameter meaning. It only implicitly references 'criterion' and 'top N', leaving 'opt_path', 'n', and 'descending' unexplained. The default values are in the schema, but the description adds no insight beyond that.

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 verb 'sort' and the resource 'optimization passes', specifying that it returns the top N. However, it lacks context on what exactly an optimization pass is, and does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'parse_optimization' or 'read_tester_report' which may also deal with passes.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, expected input data, or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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