etabs_check_is1893_drift

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, destructive, idempotent, and openWorld hints. Description adds context about the compliance calculation and the format of the output (tabulated PASS/FAIL report). No contradiction.

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?

Highly concise: five sentences front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by brief parameter explanations and return description. No redundant information.

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?

Fully handles the tool's scope: specifies code clause, required inputs, optional parameter, and output format. Given the output schema exists, no further details needed. Complete for a read-only analysis check.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description thoroughly explains all three parameters, including the optional story_heights_m dict and its purpose (absolute drift in mm vs ratio only), adding valuable meaning beyond the raw 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?

Clearly states it runs IS 1893:2016 Cl. 7.11.1 inter-storey drift compliance check, listing the specific code clause and PASS/FAIL classification. Distinct from siblings like etabs_get_story_drifts which likely only retrieve drifts without compliance assessment.

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?

Explicitly defines the purpose: compliance check per a specific code clause. Does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools, but the purpose is singular and clear, making misuse unlikely.

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