tell

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but gives minimal behavioral info. Does not state side effects, return value, or any constraints (e.g., required study state). The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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?

Extremely concise (single sentence) but under-specified. Not wasteful, but fails to provide necessary detail for correct usage.

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 two required parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the role of the tool within the broader optimization workflow or clarify how it differs from similar sibling tools.

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 adds no meaning to parameters. 'trial_number' and 'values' are left unexplained; their purpose and expected format are unclear without external domain knowledge.

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 'Report the result of a trial' is vague but not a tautology. It states a verb 'report' and resource 'result of a trial', but lacks specificity on what reporting entails (e.g., updating a trial with values). Fails to distinguish from sibling tools like 'add_trial'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'add_trial' or 'ask'. No prerequisites or context for invocation are mentioned.

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