Predefined spectral-index formula templates (bare-dict, keyed by index id).

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is known. Description adds 'bare-dict' to specify return format. But no mention of potential size, caching, or any side effects. Adds modest value beyond annotations.

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 sentence identical to the title. It is concise but adds no new information. Should at least clarify the action or return structure. Not verbose, but not optimally informative.

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 (no real parameters, read-only, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose. However, it does not explain what 'index id' refers to or the nature of the formula templates, which might be necessary for full understanding.

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 has 2 parameters (x-api-key and cogemptyinput), both standard or trivial. Description does not mention them, but they require no additional explanation. Schema coverage is 0% but parameters are self-explanatory. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 versus alternatives such as 'analytics.validate_formula' or 'band_formulas.list'. The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' implies safe calling, but no explicit when or when-not advice.

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