to_incremental

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that unobserved cells stay unobserved, provides the exact formula, and mentions the return value structure (dict with 'triangle' and disclaimer). This is good transparency for a transformation tool.

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 concise, using formulas and clear statements. It is front-loaded with the purpose, then provides the formula and a note about unobserved cells. No wasted sentences.

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 existence of an output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return value. The tool is simple, and all necessary information (input format, transformation logic, treatment of nulls) is covered.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by describing the parameter as 'Cumulative triangle, possibly with unobserved cells.' This goes beyond the schema's type definition and helps the agent understand the expected input.

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 'Convert a cumulative triangle to incremental (per-period) values', providing a specific verb and resource. The sibling tool 'to_cumulative' does the opposite, so it distinguishes itself effectively.

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 explains the mathematical transformation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives like 'to_cumulative'. Implicitly, it's for converting cumulative to incremental, but no when-not-to or contextual guidance is given.

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