create_aligned_sum

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool creates a new measurement and applies current settings, and requires a prior setup. However, it does not mention side effects, error conditions, permissions, or return value, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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, no filler. The first sentence states the action and specifics; the second gives the prerequisite. Perfectly 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?

For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description explains the purpose and prerequisite adequately. It does not describe return format or error handling, but the creation of a new measurement implies the outcome. Slight gap, but overall complete enough.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema is trivially complete at 100% coverage. The description adds context about what the operation does, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool. Baseline 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create'), identifies the resource ('new measurement'), and explains the exact operation (sum of alignment tool's A and B with current settings). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like align_measurements (setup) and arithmetic (generic math).

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 states the prerequisite to run align_measurements or configure_alignment first, giving clear context for when to use. It does not provide explicit exclusions or alternative tools, but the context is sufficient.

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