create_tabular_amplitude

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the creation action and two arguments; it does not explain how smooth affects the amplitude, which model is modified, whether existing amplitudes are overwritten, or what side effects occur. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a clean Args breakdown. It contains no filler, though the Args section is incomplete relative to the five parameters in the schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is unnecessary. However, for a model-mutating tool among many create_* siblings, the description does not explain when to choose tabular over smooth-step or periodic amplitudes, and several parameters remain undocumented in prose, limiting how confidently an agent can invoke the 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?

The description adds real meaning for data by describing it as '(time/frequency, amplitude) tuples' and lists valid values for smooth. However, it omits the required name parameter as well as timeout and model_name, so it only partially compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 a clear action and resource: 'Create a tabular amplitude.' The word 'tabular' separates it from the sibling smooth-step and periodic amplitude tools, though the description does not explicitly contrast those alternatives or explain the concept further.

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 when-to-use guidance is given. The data argument hints at time/frequency-based input, but the description never tells an agent to prefer this tool over create_smooth_step_amplitude or create_periodic_amplitude, and it offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or context for choosing among the amplitude tools.

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