List Singularis recipes

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: the listing is exhaustive ('every job kind the service runs') and explicitly free of cost, which matters next to cost-measuring compute siblings.

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 tight sentences with the contents front-loaded and the usage/follow-up appended; nothing is padded. The one-word 'Free.' fragment is terse but carries real decision-relevant information.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, and it correctly focuses on what the listing contains and how to act on it. Missing only minor operational detail such as ordering or pagination of the library listing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the 4 baseline applies. The description correctly implies no filtering or scope arguments are needed, matching the empty argument 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the Singularis recipe library') and enumerates exactly what each entry contains — job kind, input schema, the check returned, and cost metric. This is enough for an agent to distinguish it from the runnable solver siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a clear trigger ('when a task is numerical but not covered by the named tools') and an explicit follow-up action ('then run it with singularis_dispatch'), naming the alternative tool by name. It lacks an explicit when-not statement, but the routing is unambiguous.

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