athena_regime_geometry_resolve

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the return value. It does not mention side effects, permissions, state dependencies, or whether this is a safe read-only operation. The phrase 'evidence-weighted' hints at a computational process but is not elaborated.

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-loaded with the verb 'Return', and immediately communicates the core output. It is efficiently structured and easy to parse.

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 has three parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It omits parameter usage, output structure, and any context about how this tool fits among the many sibling tools, leaving an agent ill-equipped to invoke it correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (signals, top_k, domain). It does not describe what 'signals' should contain, how top_k affects results, or what domain values are expected. The description adds no parameter insight beyond the schema's bare names.

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 a specific verb ('Return') and a specific resource ('nearest evidence-weighted learned regime centroids plus the coarse V4 regime'), which distinguishes it from siblings like athena_regime_resolve. However, 'coarse V4 regime' is unexplained, and the description does not explicitly differentiate it from athena_regime_geometry_observe.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as athena_regime_geometry_observe or athena_resolve. There are no context cues, prerequisites, or exclusions provided.

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