estimate_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It discloses async nature (returns task_id), but lacks details on error handling, permissions, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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 concise, with two sentences that directly state the tool's purpose and a key parameter format, no unnecessary words.

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 7 parameters and async behavior, the description lacks explanation of essential parameters (qasm, backend_name) and does not specify output schema details, making it 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?

Only the 'observable' parameter's format is described; the remaining 6 parameters (qasm, backend_name, shots, etc.) have no explanation despite 0% schema description coverage, leaving significant gaps.

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 submits an expectation-estimation task, specifies the observable format, and tells the agent to fetch results with get_task_result_tool, distinguishing it from sibling tools like sample_tool.

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 mentions using get_task_result_tool for results, implying the submission-only role, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to other sibling tools like sample_tool.

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