Array Operations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description carries lower burden. It adds context about supporting array-array and array-scalar operations, and provides examples. However, it doesn't mention edge cases (e.g., shape mismatch, type handling) or performance implications.

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?

Description is concise and front-loaded with purpose. Examples are helpful but could be trimmed or organized as bulleted list. Overall, every sentence adds value, though some redundancy exists.

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 output schema exists and sibling tools are listed, the description sufficiently covers element-wise array operations. It explains supported operation types and input formats. Lacks discussion of return structure, but output schema mitigates this. Adequate for the complexity.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds examples for operation, array1, array2, but these illustrate rather than add new semantics. Explanation of context and output_mode remains schema-only. No additional meaning beyond what schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states 'Perform element-wise operations on arrays using Polars' with specific verb and resource. Examples illustrate common operations. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like array_transform or matrix_operations, which may have overlapping capabilities.

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 (e.g., array_aggregate, array_statistics). Description does not specify prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use. The context signal of sibling tools is not leveraged.

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