detect_loops

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not state whether the tool has side effects (e.g., writes data), requires specific permissions, or is safe to call repeatedly. It only says it 'runs algorithms' and 'returns patterns', offering no insight into side effects or state changes.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word contributes to the purpose, making it appropriately sized and easy to parse.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and partially documented parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a 'loop pattern' is, what the return value looks like, whether there are prerequisites, or how it relates to get_loops. While simple, it misses essential context needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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 50% (only window_size has a description). The description mentions 'session' but does not elaborate on session_id or window_size. It adds no meaningful parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, and it fails to compensate for the undocumented session_id 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Run loop detection algorithms on a session and return detected loop patterns.' It uses a specific verb ('Run') and identifies the resource (a session) and the output (detected loop patterns). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_loops', which likely retrieves existing loops rather than performing detection.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_loops'. The description implies usage for running detection, but it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., session must exist), exclusions, or compare with sibling tools. This is 'no guidance' beyond the basic action.

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