start_neb

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the tool runs in the background, is steerable with specific commands (pause/resume/abort/set_fmax/switch_optimizer/set_climb), and that get_results returns forward/reverse barriers and image energies.

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?

Three sentences front-load the core purpose, then add steerability and output details. No redundant words; each sentence adds value.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers high-level behavior but lacks parameter details for most inputs. Missing explanation of required parameters (initial_id, final_id, calculator_id) and their roles.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description must explain parameters. Only nimages and climb are explained; the other 8 parameters (optimizer, fmax, steps, interpolation, step_delay, etc.) are not described, 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?

Description clearly states it starts a nudged elastic band calculation for reaction barriers between two endpoints, with explicit mention of key parameter nimages. Distinguishes from sibling tools like start_relaxation and start_md by specifying the NEB context.

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?

Description indicates this tool is for barrier calculations and compares its steerability to relaxations, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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