compare

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic purpose and gives no detail about output format, whether it is a read-only operation, or how it obtains data. This leaves the agent without essential information about side effects and results.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It contains no filler and every word contributes to understanding the tool's 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?

Despite having only two string parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain what the comparison returns or how it is presented. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should cover this, but it does not, leaving the agent with incomplete guidance.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameters, each with descriptions and example values. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 uses the specific verb 'Compare' and identifies the resource as 'two Star Trek subjects side-by-side,' with examples (characters, ships, species). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that fetch single subjects (get_article, get_starship) or perform other operations.

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 when to use the tool—when a side-by-side comparison of two subjects is needed—and this context is clear. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, so it does not fully meet the highest bar.

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