malcolm_field_profile

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears the full burden. It reveals temporal behavior: 'Omit = recent-only; pass a range for historical data.' It does not mention error handling or performance, but the temporal disclosure is valuable.

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 brief, with the main purpose in the first sentence, a helpful example, and clear parameter descriptions. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's purpose, the description covers core behavior and parameter usage. It does not describe the output schema, but that is not required per rules. Could mention how to interpret results, but the example helps.

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 0% (only titles exist), but the description provides explicit parameter descriptions for field, time_from, and time_to in the Args section, adding significant meaning beyond the 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?

The description states 'Show which event.dataset types contain a specific field,' which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like field_search (search field values) and field_values (list distinct values).

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 says 'Helps determine if a field is available for a given data type' and gives a concrete example. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives among the many siblings.

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