palace_results

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

Since there are no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It effectively discloses the scope of data handled (the specific file types summarized) and describes a key operational capability (the optional creation and content of the Touchstone output file).

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 highly concise, efficiently combining the primary function (summarize) and the secondary, conditional function (write Touchstone) into one well-structured sentence.

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 complexity of the task (parsing multiple proprietary output formats and handling optional complex outputs), the description is not complete enough. The complete lack of parameter semantics makes it impossible for an agent to correctly formulate the inputs, despite the high-level functional summary.

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%, yet the description focuses entirely on the input data structure (the folder contents) rather than explaining the semantics of the five specific input parameters (e.g., what 'z0' represents or how 'config' is used). It fails to compensate for the severe schema documentation gap.

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 clearly defines the purpose: to summarize a 'Palace output folder.' It also specifies the types of data included (S-parameters, eigenmodes, etc.), distinguishing this results aggregation tool from the other specialized 'palace_' siblings.

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 usage is heavily implied, as it requires an existing 'Palace output folder,' suggesting it must be called after a run. However, it provides clear guidance on one functional aspect: that the Touchstone writing is optional, which guides how the agent should interact with the parameters.

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