wavefunction__collapse

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'actionable commitment' and 'weighted by stake' but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, required permissions, or what constitutes a 'wavefunction'. The behavioral implications are vague.

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 with a bracket prefix, which makes it concise but the structure is odd. While it avoids redundancy, it sacrifices clarity and fails to structure information effectively.

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 tool's abstract nature, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the output is, how the process works, or what constitutes a 'wavefunction'. The tool requires much more context for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (user_id, stake_amount) with zero description coverage. The description does not explain their meaning, how they affect the operation, or the role of stake_amount. No value added for parameter understanding.

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 states it 'Collapse the user's wavefunction into an actionable commitment, weighted by stake,' which indicates a specific verb and resource, but the term 'wavefunction' is metaphorical and unclear. It differentiates from siblings like 'intake' and 'find_matches' by mentioning commitment, but the purpose is not fully concrete.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like wavefunction__intake or wavefunction__register_collective. The description provides no contextual clues for selection.

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