rew_compression_analysis

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states an analysis action, implying read-only behavior, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, data requirements, or output expectations. This is insufficient given the lack of annotations.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the core purpose. It is appropriately concise and wastes no words.

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 with complex parameters (an array of objects) and no output schema, the one-line description is grossly incomplete. It does not define expected inputs, output format, or how it integrates with the REW analysis workflow. The agent would struggle to call this 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 description provides zero explanation of the two required parameters, 'entries' and 'levelsDbfs'. With schema description coverage at 0%, the agent has no semantic understanding of what these arrays represent or how to populate them. The schema only offers structural details, so the description completely fails to compensate.

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 action (analyze), the specific resource (matched REW sweep-level ladder), and the goal (frequency-dependent output compression). It conveys a specific analytical purpose that distinguishes it from sibling tools like rew_crossover_analysis, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus other REW analysis tools, nor any mention of prerequisites or conditions. The description only states what it does, not when to invoke it.

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