nds_get_separation_energy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data source (AME2020) and available types, but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, describe output format, or mention error behavior. The gaps are notable but not severe for a simple retrieval tool.

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 conveys the action, resource, source, and supported types with zero wasted words. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with fully documented parameters and a clear one-line purpose. The description does not explain the return format, but given the absence of an output schema and the straightforward nature of the retrieval, the provided information is nearly sufficient. A small gap remains regarding what the response 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only echoes the enum values (Sn, Sp, S2n, S2p) already listed in the schema and adds no additional meaning about the Z, A, or type parameters 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('nucleon separation energies from AME2020'), listing the exact energy types (Sn, Sp, S2n, S2p). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nds_get_mass or nds_get_q_value.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool—whenever separation energies are needed—but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The specificity provides strong contextual guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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