compare_conditions

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

No annotations provided, so description must convey behavior. It describes the operation as a comparison but does not disclose whether it is read-only, how it handles missing data, or any statistical methods used. Adequate but lacks detail.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action ('compare a health metric across different conditions') immediately.

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?

Lacks output schema and does not describe return format or example results. For a comparison tool, knowing the output structure (e.g., averages, differences) would aid agent understanding. Otherwise, sufficiently covers parameters.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by listing all condition options (manual and auto-tracked) beyond the schema's brief description. Parameter semantics are enriched.

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?

Description clearly states it compares a health metric across conditions, listing both manual tags and auto-tracked conditions. This distinguishes it from siblings like correlate_metrics or compare_periods.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use: comparing metrics under specified conditions. Does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention when not to use, but the purpose is straightforward given the sibling set.

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