get_results_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions the return format but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or safety (e.g., read-only). With no annotation support, the description is insufficient for full transparency.

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 structured as a docstring with a clear first line and parameter/return sections. It is efficient but could be slightly more concise, though it remains readable and focused.

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 covers the basic purpose and return structure, but lacks details on edge cases (e.g., empty or non-existent directories). Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, it is adequate but not fully 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?

The description explains the directory parameter's purpose and default behavior ('defaults to simulation output dir'), adding meaning beyond the schema (which lacks descriptions). This compensates for 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 clearly states 'Summarise simulation results in a directory' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_result_files (lists files, not summary) and query_* tools (queries specific formats).

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 for summarizing results but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like export_results_to_json or query tools. No when-not or alternative recommendations are given.

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