aetre_recall_scaling_curve

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral burden. It discloses only the calculation action and does not state read-only nature, absence of side effects, or expected output format. For a theoretical tool, this leaves uncertainty about side effects and return type.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core action and resource, includes illustrative multipliers, and has zero extraneous content. Efficient and to the point.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description should clarify the return value or data format; it does not. It also omits any mention of prerequisites or typical use case scenarios, leaving agents to infer what the curve output looks like. The core purpose is clear, but surrounding context is incomplete.

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 covers all 5 parameters at 100%, so baseline is 3. The description reinforces the 'multipliers' parameter with example values and adds the concept of 'capacity collapse points' but does not provide additional syntax or semantics beyond the schema. Adequate but not enhanced.

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?

States a specific verb 'Calculates' with a precise resource 'Proposition 1 theoretical recall decay curve' and scope 'across arrival expansion scales'. Clearly differentiates from sibling aetre_proposition_1_bound by focusing on the curve and capacity collapse.

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?

Implied usage: to analyze recall decay under scaling, but no explicit statement on when to choose this over alternatives like aetre_proposition_1_bound or aetre_system_catalog. Lacks any 'when not to use' guidance.

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