add_uniform_random_timer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the placement ('under the given parent'), the randomized delay calculation, and that a fresh random value is picked before each sample. It does not mention error behavior or persistence, but the core runtime behavior is clear.

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 sentence with no filler; the action, target, placement, and calculation are all front-loaded.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete but omits planId semantics and any indication of what happens if the parent is invalid. It covers the core behavior but not the full invocation context.

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 only 40%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies delayMs and rangeMs through the formula, and 'under the given parent' hints at parentId, but planId is left unexplained. The formula also conflicts slightly with the schema's 'added on top of' wording ('+/-' vs '+').

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 names a specific verb ('Add'), a specific resource ('Uniform Random Timer'), and its purpose ('pace requests with a randomized delay'). It also gives the delay formula, which distinguishes it from sibling timers like add_constant_timer.

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 implies when to use it: when randomized pacing is desired. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so the agent must infer the choice from the 'randomized delay' wording.

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