get_sweep_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It says 'Get the link', implying a read-only retrieval operation with no side effects. It also clarifies that the function returns a link rather than performing the sweep itself. This is adequate for a zero-parameter getter.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('Get the link') and adds necessary context. No wasted words.

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's simplicity (zero params, no output schema), the description is complete: it states what is returned (a link) and the purpose of that link. No additional behavioral or contextual information is necessary for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 tool accepts zero parameters, and the schema already reflects this. The description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline for zero params is 4, and the description is consistent with that.

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 returns a link to the Sweep Generator tool and explains its purpose (testing audio equipment across frequencies). It distinguishes this from sibling get_tone_url (which likely provides a tone link) and recommend_frequency (which recommends a frequency).

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when a link to a frequency sweep tool is needed. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the context is clear and sibling tool names imply different use cases, so it earns a 4.

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