alterios_call_readonly_service

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It only states 'read-only', implying no side effects, but no details on authentication, rate limits, or consequences of invocation. The agent cannot assess behavioral traits.

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 short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It fails to add value beyond the tool name and title, wasting the opportunity to provide useful information.

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 4 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, but an output schema exists, the description is severely incomplete. It provides no guidance on input behavior, return values, or when to call this tool.

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%, and the description adds no parameter information. The four parameters (function, args, profile, project_id) are not explained. The agent must guess their meaning and format.

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?

Description states 'Call a known read-only Alterios script service' with verb 'Call' and resource 'script service'. It indicates read-only nature, distinguishing from the write sibling. However, it lacks specificity about what 'calling a script service' entails and how it differs from other tools like 'alterios_execute_manual_script'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The agent has no information to decide between this and sibling tools beyond the 'read-only' hint.

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