get_acm_score

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state what the tool returns, whether it has side effects, requires authorization, or is read-only. The phrase 'Consciousness Assessment (Proxy)' gives no insight into behavior, making this a significant transparency gap.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than concise clarity. A single vague phrase does not earn the tool's place, and it fails to provide any meaningful structuring or front-loaded information.

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 tool has no annotations, no output schema, and a single ambiguous phrase, the description is completely inadequate for an agent to understand what this tool does. It lacks even basic context about the returned score, units, range, or purpose within the larger system.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are no parameters to document, and the description does not need to add 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 'Consciousness Assessment (Proxy)' is a vague noun phrase that lacks a clear verb and resource specification. It does not explicitly state that the tool returns a score or performs an assessment, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name ('get_acm_score') and the context. This is more than a tautology but falls short of a clear purpose statement.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. There is no mention of context, alternatives, or exclusions, so the agent has no information about the appropriate use case.

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