util_stddev

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states the high-level function; it does not disclose whether it computes sample or population standard deviation, how missing values are handled, or any edge cases. This is insufficient for a data processing tool.

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 that directly states the purpose. It is concise and front-loaded with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 simplicity of the tool (two parameters, no output schema), the description is acceptable but leaves gaps. It does not explain the return value (e.g., single number), the algorithm (population vs sample), or how the optional 'average' parameter is used. For a utility tool, more detail would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters ('价格数组' and '预计算均值'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation but not exceeding it.

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 '计算数组的标准差' clearly states the tool calculates standard deviation of an array. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling utilities like util_average or util_median. However, the description is minimal and could be more explicit (e.g., 'population or sample standard deviation').

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no context on when not to use it, and no mention of prerequisites. Given the many sibling tools (e.g., util_var, util_average), this omission hinders correct tool selection.

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