collection_sort

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states the basic operation. It doesn't disclose sort ordering rules, stability, handling of mixed/null types, or mutation behavior (in-place vs. copy).

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and only two terse parameter lines. Efficient, though the 'Args:' formatting is boilerplate rather than tailored guidance.

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 values need no explanation, and the two params are documented. But given no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the absence of sort ordering semantics, type handling, and mutation behavior leaves gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate; it documents both parameters (items as the list, reverse as descending order). However 'items: The list to sort' largely restates the schema, and sort key/ordering semantics remain unspecified.

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?

States a clear verb+resource ('Sort a list of items'), which is distinguishable from siblings like collection_merge or collection_flatten. However, it doesn't differentiate itself explicitly from those siblings (e.g., whether it sorts in place, returns a copy, or handles keys).

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 indication of when to use this over alternatives or any context about prerequisites. It simply states what the tool does without usage guidance.

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