athena_structural_bootstrap_ensemble

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only' and warns that 'bootstrap frequency is not a causal posterior,' which are valuable behavioral disclosures. With no annotations provided, these clarifications help the agent understand side effects and interpretation. However, it does not cover other behavioral aspects like computational cost or determinism.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and output, and includes a caveat. Every word earns its place; no fluff or 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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too thin for an agent to invoke correctly. It does not explain what 'bounded V13 FCI-lite' means, what the return object looks like, or what the parameters do. It only gives a high-level summary.

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 provides no explanation for any of the 7 parameters (seed, alpha, samples, variables, bootstrap_runs, max_conditioning, stable_threshold). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's bare parameter 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 action ('Bootstrap the bounded V13 FCI-lite discovery surface') and a specific output ('return procedural graph-variant/marked-edge stability'). The jargon distinguishes it from more general causal discovery or bootstrap tools, though it is dense.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like athena_causal_structure_bootstrap or athena_fci_lite_discover. The phrase 'bounded V13 FCI-lite' implies a particular use case, but there is no when/when-not statement or alternative comparison.

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