greet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool creates a personalized message but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has side effects, or details about the output format. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral aspects, output format, and usage context. For a tool with one parameter, it should provide more guidance on how the greeting is generated or what the result looks like.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'name' parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, as it doesn't explain parameter usage or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('greet') and resource ('someone'), specifying it creates a personalized message. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'calculate' or 'weather_info', which are unrelated, so no sibling distinction is needed but could be mentioned for completeness.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, such as when to choose 'greet' over other communication tools or in what scenarios it's appropriate.

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