quartiles

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. It states the operation and its outputs, which implies a pure, read-only calculation, but it does not mention edge-case handling (e.g., empty arrays, interpolation method) or confirm the absence of side effects. The presence of an output schema covers the return format, so the gap is moderate.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the operation and outputs immediately, which is appropriate for a simple calculation tool.

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?

For a simple one-parameter statistical tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits usage guidance relative to siblings and does not address edge cases or input expectations, leaving some gaps for an agent to navigate.

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 single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It refers to 'a dataset' but adds no details about the expected input format, whether the array can be empty, or how the numbers should be structured. The schema name and type are self-explanatory, but the description adds little beyond that.

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 gives a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('quartiles') and even names the three outputs (Q1, Q2, Q3), so the operation is clear. However, it does not differentiate this tool from overlapping siblings such as percentile, median, or iqr, which could also produce some of these values.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like percentile, median, or iqr. The description simply states what it calculates, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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