sensor_olfactory

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits (side effects, output format, dependencies). It only states a mapping transformation, omitting details about what the tool actually does (e.g., simulation, hardware encoding).

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 terse—a single phrase—which sacrifices helpfulness for brevity. While front-loaded, it lacks sentences and fails to convey essential context. Every word should earn its place; here too few words are used to be informative.

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 nested parameters and absence of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how the encoding works, or the role of each parameter in the process. A more comprehensive description is needed for effective use.

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 description coverage is 100% per context, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides (defaults, types). It does not explain the meaning or typical use of parameters like numReceptors, temporalPhase, etc.

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 olfactory encoding from chemoreceptor to latent space, which distinguishes it from other sensor tools (audio, visual). However, it lacks an explicit action verb (e.g., 'simulates', 'computes'), making it slightly less direct.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The description provides no context for appropriate usage.

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