extract_fields

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

Discloses the use of GPT-5.6 and states that no contact details are sent. No annotations are present, but the description does not cover side effects or mutation behavior, leaving some ambiguity.

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 sentences that are dense and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value without verbosity.

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?

Covers the main purpose and provides a usage hint, but lacks description of the return format or behavior for the 'limit' parameter. No output schema exists, so more detail would help.

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 description partially explains the 'text' parameter (provide for new review, omit for mock) but gives no details about the 'limit' parameter (integer, default 25). With 0% schema coverage, this is insufficient.

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 verb 'extract' and the resource 'structured quality, amenity, and concern data from apartment-review text'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like classify_submission and summarize_batch by focusing on extraction.

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?

Provides guidance on when to provide text (for a new review) vs. omit it (for mock reviews). However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use directives or mentions of alternatives.

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