morse_timing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'Get timing data', with no disclosure of behavior (e.g., input validation, error handling, rate limits). For a tool that likely returns structured data, this is insufficient.

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 short sentence, no wasted words. However, it might be too terse; a bit more detail (e.g., 'Returns a list of durations') would improve usefulness without harming 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?

With 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about return values or usage. It lacks details on what the output looks like, which is critical for an agent to interpret results.

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%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. 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?

The description clearly states it 'get timing data for Morse audio/light generation', specifying the verb 'get' and resource 'timing data'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like morse_encode/morse_decode which handle actual encoding/decoding. However, 'timing data' is vague and doesn't specify what is returned (e.g., durations per symbol).

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 vs alternatives like morse_encode. The description lacks context about prerequisites or typical use cases. Given sibling tools covering encoding/decoding, this omission makes it harder for an agent to choose correctly.

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