calibration_resolve

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 does not mention whether the operation is destructive, irreversible, or requires specific permissions. The update implied by 'resolve' is not clarified, and there is no info on side effects like Brier score recalculation.

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: one sentence explaining purpose plus a brief parameter list. No fluff. The 'Args:' block is acceptable and structured, but could be more efficiently integrated.

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?

The description lacks mentions of prerequisites (e.g., existence of prediction), error conditions, or confirmation of successful resolution. An output schema exists but is not referenced. For a simple tool, the description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning to all three parameters: prediction_id is linked to calibration_predict, outcome explained as 'What actually happened', and correct explained as boolean. This goes beyond the schema titles, though format details for outcome are missing.

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 explicitly states 'Resolve a calibration prediction with the actual outcome' and mentions it feeds Brier score calculation. The verb 'resolve' and resource 'calibration prediction' are specific, and the tool is clearly distinguished from siblings like calibration_predict and calibration_score.

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 after calibration_predict by noting prediction_id comes from that tool, but it does not explicitly state when to use vs. alternatives or provide exclusions. No guidance on sequence relative to calibration_score.

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