say_hello

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states that the tool 'Returns: A friendly greeting,' which clearly indicates a side-effect-free, pure operation. No hidden state changes or side effects are implied, so the coverage is adequate for a tool of this simplicity.

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 extremely concise, containing only one line of prose plus a simple Args and Returns block. Every sentence adds necessary information, with no filler or redundancy.

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 trivial complexity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the function, the parameter semantics, and the return value, leaving no meaningful gaps.

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 provides only the parameter name, type, and default, with no semantic description. The description adds essential meaning: 'name: The name to greet (defaults to 'world').' This fully clarifies the parameter's purpose, exceeding the schema's minimal information.

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 tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Say hello to someone.' This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools (cimd_resolve, cimd_cache_info, cimd_clear_cache), which all deal with caching and resolution.

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 the tool (whenever a greeting is needed) but does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions. Since the siblings are unrelated, there is no risk of confusion, but the tool does not go beyond stating its basic function.

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