detect_patterns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it requires auth, is read-only, or if it stores data. For an analysis tool, more transparency about side effects is expected.

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, concise and front-loaded. However, it could benefit from breaking out details about output or usage without adding length.

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 the complexity of 22 sibling tools and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not mention return values or output format, even though an output schema exists. The tool's purpose is underspecified compared to alternatives.

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 100% for both parameters, and the description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'problem' is described as 'The full text of the problem description'). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Analyze problem text to detect patterns, difficulty, and complexity hints.' This gives a verb and resource but is vague about what kinds of patterns are detected. Among siblings like analyze_complexity and estimate_difficulty, it lacks differentiation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., analyze_complexity, identify_topics, estimate_difficulty). The description implies general analysis but does not set boundaries or exclusions.

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