predictions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, what format the predictions are returned in, whether there's pagination, or any rate limits. The description provides minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 just 5 words, front-loading the essential information with zero wasted words. Every element ('List', 'active predictions', 'on AgentDrop') serves a clear purpose in communicating the tool's function.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient for a listing tool. It doesn't explain what 'active predictions' means, what data is returned, whether authentication is required, or how results are structured. For a tool that presumably returns data objects, more context about the return format would be helpful.

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 has 100% description coverage, with the 'limit' parameter clearly documented in the schema itself. The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without adding extra 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 clearly states the action ('List') and target resource ('active predictions on AgentDrop'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'prediction_comment' or 'prediction_take', which also deal with predictions but serve different purposes.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'prediction_take' (likely for making predictions) and 'prediction_comment' (likely for commenting on predictions), there's no indication of when this listing tool is appropriate versus those other prediction-related tools.

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