roll_dice

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a random simulation but does not explicitly state that it generates random results, nor does it mention any side effects or constraints. The presence of an output schema is not referenced. This is adequate for a simple tool but lacks thoroughness.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it is too brief given the lack of parameter details and behavioral context, missing opportunities to add value while remaining efficient.

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 and the existence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the notation format, handling of multiple rolls, or what the tool returns. Essential details for correct invocation are missing.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of parameters. It does not clarify what 'notation' means (e.g., '2d6+3') or the role of 'num_rolls'. This forces the agent to rely solely on the schema, which has no descriptions for the properties.

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 the action ('Roll the dice') and the input ('with the given notation'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It is a specific verb+resource pair that distinguishes it from unrelated sibling tools like stock_info and web_search.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context. While siblings are unrelated, the description lacks any indication of appropriate scenarios or exclusions.

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