explain_anomaly

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

No annotations provided, and description fails to disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention return values, side effects, or how context_window affects output, leaving agent uninformed.

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?

Description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It is not verbose, but brevity comes at the cost of informativeness.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and two parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It does not tell the agent what output to expect, how to interpret results, or how context_window modifies behavior.

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 0%, and description adds no explanation for parameters. 'anomaly_id' and 'context_window' are self-explanatory from names but description should add context like where to get anomaly_id and what context_window represents (e.g., days).

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?

Description 'Understand what caused unusual patterns' indicates the tool explains anomalies, but it lacks specificity. It does not clearly distinguish from sibling 'detect_anomalies' or specify the nature of the explanation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., detect_anomalies). No prerequisites or context provided, such as needing an anomaly_id from detection.

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