Levels of Causation

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

Annotations indicate read-only, safe, idempotent behavior. The description adds no behavioral or contextual information beyond what annotations already provide, such as return value characteristics or processing expectations.

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 short but under-specified rather than effectively concise. It lacks essential information and does not earn its place with valuable content.

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 11 parameters, no schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description is extremely incomplete. It fails to explain what 'causation tiers' are, what data is needed, or what the output represents.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description does not elaborate any parameters. The example request body is malformed and uninformative. No parameter meaning is added beyond the schema.

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 'Schmidt's causation tiers' is a brief label that essentially restates the tool name without an explicit verb or action. It does not clearly state what the tool does, nor does it differentiate from many sibling tools with similar naming patterns.

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. No context is provided about use cases, prerequisites, or conditions for selection.

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