simulate_chain

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

Discloses it returns per-step diagnostics and identifies safe-to-apply-through step, and mentions 1-indexed positions. Without annotations, it carries the burden but doesn't state whether it modifies state or other side effects.

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?

Two sentences, each essential: first explains function and output, second gives usage guidance and a critical positional detail. No filler.

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?

Explains purpose and outputs, but lacks details on edit format structure and error handling. With no output schema, description should clarify more about return values and edge cases.

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?

Only the 'edits' parameter gets a hint about 1-indexed positions. No description for session_id or timeout_ms, and edits structure is undocumented despite schema having no descriptions. Schema coverage 0% makes the description insufficient.

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 states it applies a sequence of edits and evaluates after each step, with a specific use case for finding the safest partial application. This distinguishes it from siblings like apply_edit and simulate_edit_atomic.

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?

Explicitly advises using it to find the safest partial application of a multi-step change, implying when to use. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it.

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