delphi_timeline

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses the cost ($0.01 USDC per call on Base via x402) but omits other critical details like read-only vs mutable, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether any side effects occur. This is insufficient for a tool that presumably executes external calls.

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 very concise at two sentences. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it sacrifices necessary details for brevity, which slightly reduces the score. A bit more structure or expansion would improve clarity.

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 the tool has no annotations, no output schema, and a single complex parameter referencing external docs, the description is minimally adequate but lacks completeness. It explains what the tool does and cost, but fails to cover usage context, expected output format, or behavioral constraints needed for reliable agent use.

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 input schema has one parameter 'input' described as 'Free-form input payload' with an external URL for details. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3, and no extra value is added.

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 it provides 'chronological fact history for any entity,' which is a specific verb (retrieves history) and resource (entity timeline). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delphi_entity' or 'delphi_query' by focusing on chronological facts.

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. It mentions pricing but provides no context about prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions. The agent is left without direction on selecting this tool over siblings.

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