home

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a key trait: home is a timeline, not a point, meaning it returns a sequence over time rather than a single address. This prevents misuse, though it does not specify the exact output format or whether it includes current residences.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Both sentences add distinct value: the first states what it returns, the second clarifies the conceptual model and usage. No wasted 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?

For a simple no-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the fundamental difference from a point-in-time location and instructs on usage. It could be more explicit about return values (e.g., list of addresses with dates), but the phrase 'where they have lived and when' sufficiently implies this.

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 tool has zero parameters, giving a baseline of 4. The description adds context by explaining why no address parameter is needed: because home is a timeline covering all residences, so the tool should be consulted rather than assuming one address. This reinforces the parameter-less design.

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 provides a history of residences ('Where they have lived and when'), and explicitly distinguishes it from a single-address assumption. However, it lacks a specific verb like 'list' or 'get', and the purpose is expressed as a noun phrase rather than an actionable command.

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 second sentence gives direct usage guidance: 'anything home-relative has to read this rather than assume one address.' This tells the agent when to use this tool and warns against assuming a single point. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools, but the contrast with 'point' implies current_location or similar.

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