Aromatherapy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only offers a poetic phrase about 'calming scent' and 'unhurried tone.' It does not state what happens when the tool is invoked, whether it modifies a message, what the return value is, or any side effects. This is a significant transparency gap.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices clarity for brevity, leaving essential information implicit. It is not tautological, but it is too vague to be considered well-structured for an AI agent.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description should still clarify the input-output relationship and the impact of the 'note' parameter. It does not explain how the scent affects the message or what the agent should do with this tool, making it inadequate for correct invocation.

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 schema includes one parameter, 'note', with an enum of scents and a description 'Preferred scent note.' Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter, but the schema already adequately explains it, so no penalty is applied.

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 'A calming scent and an unhurried tone for your next message' describes a desired effect rather than a concrete action. It lacks a clear verb, specifies no resource being operated on, and does not explain what the tool does with the input or what output to expect. This makes it ambiguous and not distinct from siblings in terms of function.

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 like meditation or breathe. There are no context cues, exclusions, or conditions mentioned, leaving the agent without any basis for choosing 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.