started_podlings_by_year

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states it returns results; no mention of side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether it is a read-only operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the name implies.

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, succinct sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, achieving clarity with minimal words.

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?

Despite the tool having three parameters and no output schema, the description is extremely sparse. It does not explain what 'podlings' are, the role of the 'source' or 'sponsor_type' parameters, or indicate the return format. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more 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 description coverage is 100%, meaning all three parameters are already described in the input schema. The tool description does not add additional meaning or context for any parameter. By the rule, baseline is 3 when coverage is high, and no extra value is added.

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: 'Return the podlings that started in a specific year.' It uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('podlings that started in a specific year'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that filter by different criteria like 'active', 'completed', 'graduated', etc.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given multiple sibling tools filtering by different statuses (active, completed, graduated, retired), the agent lacks explicit context on when to choose this tool over others.

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