spss_run_syntax

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key side effects (persisting .spv and .sps files by default), prerequisites (IBM SPSS Statistics installed), and output format (Markdown). This goes beyond the schema and adds important context.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and output, followed by optional data_file behavior and then side effects/prerequisites. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 complex (7 params, no annotations) but has an output schema, so return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose, side effects, and prerequisites, but it misses key parameter behaviors like filtering and dry_run, leaving the description incomplete for fully reliable invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains data_file (prepends GET FILE) and indirectly the save flags (persisting files), but fails to describe dry_run, select_if, and filter_variable. These parameters remain under-defined for a 7-parameter tool.

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: 'Execute arbitrary SPSS syntax commands and return the output as Markdown.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools that provide specific analyses, making the general-purpose nature explicit.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the many sibling tools for specific procedures, the description should mention that this is for arbitrary syntax not covered by dedicated methods, but it does not.

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