parse_csv_triangle

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and discloses specific behaviors: handling of empty cells and tokens, stripping commas, dropping header rows, padding jagged rows, and path requirements. It lacks error handling or performance details but is still informative.

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 well-structured with separate sections (Args, Returns) and front-loaded with the main purpose. It is somewhat lengthy but each sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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 (1 parameter, no nested objects) and presence of an output schema (implied by 'Has output schema: true'), the description fully covers the tool's behavior, return values, and use case, leaving no significant gaps.

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 single parameter 'path' has no description in the input schema (coverage 0%). The tool description adds critical details: path must be absolute or ~-relative and readable by the server process, providing meaning beyond the schema type.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Parse'), resource ('CSV file'), and outcome ('cumulative loss triangle'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that perform different operations (e.g., compute_chain_ladder, project_triangle).

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 explicitly provides a usage condition: 'Use this when the user gives you a CSV file path and wants to run the chain ladder on it.' While it does not list exclusions, the guidance is clear and relevant.

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