hello_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Hello tool' gives no information about whether this is a read/write operation, what permissions might be required, what side effects occur, or what the tool actually does. It fails completely to describe 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?

While technically concise with just two words, this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description is too brief to be useful, failing to communicate essential information. Every sentence should earn its place, but here the single 'sentence' doesn't earn its place by providing meaningful content.

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 that this is a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a minimal description, the description is completely inadequate. For even a simple tool, 'Hello tool' provides insufficient context about what the tool does, when to use it, or what behavior to expect. The description fails to meet minimum requirements for completeness.

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%, with the schema clearly documenting the single 'name' parameter. The description adds no parameter information beyond what's in the schema, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline score is 3. The description doesn't compensate for any gaps because there are none in the 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 'Hello tool' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without specifying what it does. It doesn't provide a clear verb+resource combination or explain the tool's function beyond its name. While it doesn't actively mislead, it fails to communicate the tool's purpose effectively.

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 provides absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool, what context it's appropriate for, or any alternatives. With no sibling tools mentioned, the bar is lower, but the description still offers zero usage information, leaving the agent with no context for tool selection.

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