scenario_load_test

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions operations (insert, upsert imply writes) but does not clarify if it modifies state, safety, or idempotency. Behavioral traits are mostly undisclosed.

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 very short but starts with a noun phrase instead of a verb. It lacks a clear action statement and wastes space on a colon without adding necessary details.

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 having 6 parameters and an output schema, the description provides almost no context about return values, parameter effects, or use cases. Largely incomplete.

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 does not explain any of the 6 parameters (iterations, root_dir, etc.). Fails to add meaning beyond the empty schema.

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 lists operations (insert, upsert, etc.) and states it's a mixed workload load test, but lacks an explicit verb (e.g., 'runs', 'executes'). It indicates what it does but is ambiguous compared to siblings like 'benchmark_calls'.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'benchmark_calls' or 'run_e2e_flow'. No prerequisites or context provided.

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