extract_observations

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

Annotations are all false, providing no safety or side-effect profile. The description adds no behavioral details such as whether extraction is read-only, requires special permissions, has size limits, or affects the data source. The word 'bounded' hints at limits but does not specify them.

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 sentence with no wasted words, which is structurally clean. However, it is under-specified and omits essential information; it is terse rather than appropriately concise.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description is too vague to give a complete picture. It does not explain what 'bounded semantic observations' are, how they relate to a run_id, or how this extraction differs from the many sibling tools. The low parameter description coverage and lack of usage guidance leave significant gaps.

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 mention the required run_id parameter at all. The schema provides only the title 'Run Id' and a string type, so the description fails to add any meaning or usage context for the parameter.

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 states a specific action and object: 'Extract bounded semantic observations' emitted through 'flameox.sdk'. This distinguishes it from sibling extract_* tools which target different data types like traces, results, or profiling data. However, 'bounded semantic observations' is jargon-y and not fully defined, so it doesn't reach a 5.

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 the many sibling extract tools, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives. It merely states what the tool extracts, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the tool name and context.

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