snn_step

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits, but it does not. It fails to mention if this tool is destructive, modifies state, requires a running simulation, or any side effects. The agent must infer behavior from the tool name alone.

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 concise at three words, but this is under-specification rather than efficient communication. It lacks any structure or sentences. While not verbose, it fails to convey necessary 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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), a minimal description might suffice, but 'Advance SNN Simulation' is insufficient. It does not explain the effect, return value, or relationship to the simulation state. The agent cannot use this tool correctly without additional context.

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 only parameter 'steps' has schema constraints (min/max/default) but no description. The tool description does not explain what 'steps' represents (e.g., number of simulation steps, iteration count). Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no value.

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 'Advance SNN Simulation' provides a verb and a resource, giving a general sense of the tool's purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what 'advance' means (e.g., step forward in time, trigger an update). It is distinguishable from siblings like 'snn_reset' but not clearly differentiated.

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 usage guidelines provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'simulation_control' or 'snn_reset'. There is no guidance on context or prerequisites.

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