quiz

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

The description adds value beyond the annotations by disclosing that 'expected answers exist only for canonical trusted fields; mutable or uncertain fields remain null.' This provides insight into output behavior and field handling that the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) do not fully capture.

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 concise, consisting of two short sentences that each convey meaningful information. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and adds a critical behavioral detail without any redundant or unnecessary wording.

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?

While the output schema exists and annotations are present, the description fails to explain the 'ref' parameter or provide usage context. For a tool with a single required parameter and zero schema coverage, the description leaves significant gaps in understanding how to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema contains one parameter 'ref' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention 'ref' or explain its meaning, format, or possible values, leaving the agent without necessary parameter semantics.

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 identifies the tool as providing 'settlement and sheet-specific finding prompts' in a 'read-only' manner, which conveys its purpose. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'provides,' and does not distinguish itself from sibling tools beyond the topic.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what the tool is, without mentioning situations where it should or should not be used, nor any reference to sibling tools.

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