np_random_choice

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only states 'Generates a random sample' without mentioning that the operation is non-mutating, non-deterministic, or that it returns a new array. Additional context about randomness and side effects would improve transparency.

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 a single concise sentence without wasted words. It could be slightly improved by adding key details (e.g., replacement) without becoming verbose.

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 presence of an output schema (as indicated by context), the description is minimally complete in describing the overall function. However, it lacks guidance on usage and does not clarify the return shape when size is None, which the parameter description already covers.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. However, it also does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 states the verb 'Generates' and the resource 'random sample from a given array', distinguishing it from sibling tools like np_rand (uniform random numbers) or np_randint (random integers). However, it does not explicitly mention the replacement behavior, which is a key aspect of sampling.

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 versus alternatives such as np_rand, np_randint, or np_shuffle. The sibling context is available but the description does not differentiate usage scenarios.

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