calculate_dunn

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that .xlsx extension is added if omitted and specifies the return structure, but fails to mention error handling, file existence requirements, or whether the tool modifies data.

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 concise yet complete, using a clear docstring format with summary, Args, and Returns sections. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy.

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 2 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (which explains return values), the description covers the basics but lacks details like required file format, error handling, and prerequisite conditions. Could be more robust.

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%, but the description adds meaningful context for both parameters: file_name explains the data folder and automatic .xlsx addition, and max_plot_points explains default and purpose. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 runs the Dunn method on cyclic voltammetry Excel files from a data folder, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like calculate_gitt (for GITT) and list_data_files_tool (for listing files).

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 implies usage context (cyclic voltammetry Excel files) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like calculate_gitt or list_battery_methods. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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