snn_step

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

No annotations exist, and the description discloses no behavioral traits: it doesn't say whether the tool mutates simulation state, how many steps it jumps, what happens to existing simulation data, or whether it returns any result. 'Advance' implies progression, but the nature and consequences are entirely unstated.

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 conciseness. It is a single vague phrase with no structure or contextual detail.

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 tool that likely mutates simulation state, with no annotations and no output schema, this description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain side effects, prerequisites, or return values, and the sibling context suggests many related tools that could be confused with this one.

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 sole parameter 'steps' is well-constrained in the schema (integer, default 1, min 1, max 1000), but the description doesn't explain its relationship to the advance operation, and schema coverage is 0%. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 the verb 'Advance' with resource 'SNN Simulation', giving a basic sense of the tool's function, but it remains vague—no scope, timestep semantics, or distinction from sibling tools like simulation_control or snn_reset. It's not a tautology, but it lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool, what conditions apply, or how it differs from alternatives. The description doesn't mention simulation state requirements or any alternatives.

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