abstract_temporal_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses internal implementation (wraps tempprofile_to_descr.apply), explains that the profile dict uses Tuple[str, str] keys which are internally formatted and never exposed as raw tuples to JSON, and states that no MAX_LEN parameter exists. This provides useful behavioral context beyond a simple function call.

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 three concise sentences, each adding essential information: purpose, input source, internal handling, and a key constraint. No superfluous words, and the most important point is front-loaded.

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 presence of an output schema, the description appropriately does not detail return values. It covers the input, internal processing, and output nature. However, it lacks mention of possible errors or prerequisites beyond having the handle, which would improve completeness for a tool with only one input.

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 description explains that the single parameter 'temporal_profile_id' is the handle returned by discover_temporal_profile, adding meaning beyond the input schema (which has no description). This helps the agent understand the value's origin and expected type. Given schema description coverage is 0%, the description effectively compensates.

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 states 'Natural-language description of a discovered temporal profile' and clarifies it takes a handle from discover_temporal_profile. This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and resource, but does not explicitly distinguish it from all sibling tools beyond discover_temporal_profile.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Takes the handle returned by discover_temporal_profile', establishing a clear prerequisite. It also notes 'No MAX_LEN parameter; full profile is described', providing guidance on when to use this tool over a potential truncated variant. However, it does not list alternative tools or when not to use this tool.

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