analyze_report

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

The description mentions cost and includes 8 modules, but lacks disclosure of side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behaviors. Without annotations, more detail on behavioral traits is needed.

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, concise and front-loaded with the core functionality and list of modules. 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 complexity (6 params, nested objects), the description provides a good overview of the output (executive summary) but does not explain score interpretation, error handling, or constraints beyond cost.

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 coverage is 83%, so most parameters are already described. The tool description does not add significant value beyond what the schema provides.

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 runs all 8 analysis modules in one call and provides an executive summary with score and grade. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that only offer individual modules.

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?

It implies usage contexts by labeling itself as the 'most cost-effective option for comprehensive analysis,' but does not explicitly state when to avoid it or when to use siblings instead.

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