athena_delayed_credit_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, how delayed credit is aggregated, what 'confidence-weighted' means, or what the response looks like. The verb 'Summarize' hints at a read operation, but this is not explicit.

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 a single sentence with no filler, front-loading the core concept 'delayed confidence-weighted credit by action'. It is appropriately concise for a summary tool, though this brevity comes at the cost of missing contextual details.

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?

There is no output schema, no annotations, and the description does not explain key terms, parameter behavior, or return structure. Given the complexity of the domain and the number of sibling tools, this is a minimal-viable description with 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially clarifies action_id via 'by action', but limit and regime are completely unexplained in both the schema and description, leaving the agent unable to infer their meaning or format.

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 uses the verb 'Summarize' with a specific resource ('delayed confidence-weighted credit') and grouping ('by action'). This distinguishes it from the sibling 'athena_credit_summary' via 'delayed', but it does not explicitly name alternatives, so it is clear but lacks direct sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like athena_credit_summary or athena_delayed_credit_record. The description only implies a summary operation without exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative references.

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