seq

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

Description states 'Read-only, no side effects' which aligns with annotation readOnlyHint=true. Mentions output is JSON with sequence array and raw output option. Could be improved by noting the max_items limit or format behavior.

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?

Three sentences, each dense with information. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with core purpose and side effects. Ideal structure.

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 (6 parameters, no output schema), the description covers purpose, behavior, usage guidelines, and sibling references. Minor gaps: default behavior of numbers array, impact of format parameter, default max_items not mentioned.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds high-level context (start, increment, end) but does not provide significant additional meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool prints a sequence of numbers as JSON with configurable start, increment, and end values. Distinguishes from siblings 'yes' and 'printf' by mentioning they are for different purposes.

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 says when to use ('generate numeric sequences or ranges') and when not to use ('not for repeating a constant string'), with alternatives provided ('use 'yes' for fixed repetition'). Also references other tools like 'printf'.

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