seasonal_param_analysis

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states the tool 'visualises' and 'reports' coefficients, SE, t-ratios, and significance, implying a read-only analysis. It also describes the bar chart output. However, it does not explicitly confirm it makes no modifications or handle edge cases, so it falls slightly short of full 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 well-structured and appropriately detailed: a clear one-sentence purpose, bulleted list of outputs, figure description, and parameter definition. Every sentence earns its place without being 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?

The description covers what the tool does, the exact outputs (coefficients, SE, t-ratio, amplitude, significance), and the input parameter. With no output schema, this is sufficient for a visualisation tool, but it lacks guidance on prerequisites or potential error conditions like models without seasonal components.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description includes a 'Parameters' section explaining that inp_path is 'path to a fitted .inp or .pre file'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare string type and fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 starts with 'Visualise estimated seasonal harmonic parameters (cos/sin) with ±2 SE bars', providing a specific verb and resource with distinguishing detail. It clearly differentiates from siblings like 'seasonal_analysis' or 'test_seasonal_simplification' by focusing on harmonic parameter coefficients.

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 implies it is used after fitting a model with seasonal components (referring to 'harmonics present in the model' and 'fitted .inp or .pre file'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions. No sibling tools are referenced.

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