advance_time

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

Without annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions auto-pausing on triggers but doesn't specify what triggers are, whether pauses are reversible, or any side effects like order processing or event injection.

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?

Extremely concise at two short sentences. However, the brevity comes at the cost of missing critical details; it is not just conciseness but underspecification.

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?

With low complexity (1 param, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate but lacks essential context like valid ranges, scenario prerequisites, replay limits, or the nature of auto-pause triggers.

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 0% description coverage. The description only says 'by N minutes,' which adds no constraints or examples beyond the schema's 'type: number.' No bounds, precision, or negative value handling are indicated.

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?

Clearly states the tool advances the simulated market clock by N minutes, with a specific verb and resource. Though it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like time_status or resume_simulation, the simulated clock advancing is unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as resume_simulation or time_status. The auto-pause mention hints at behavior but doesn't clarify contexts or exclusions.

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