fit_duong_decline

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

No annotations provided. Description covers model and data input but does not mention output format, side effects, or error handling. Output schema exists, so return structure is partially covered.

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?

Concise with two paragraphs and a bullet. The model context is relevant but could be slightly tighter. No redundancies.

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 one parameter and existence of output schema, the description adequately covers input semantics and model purpose. Could mention output type (e.g., fitted parameters).

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?

Parameter documentation is thorough: explains expected keys ('time', 'rate', 'oil'/'gas'), units (months), and implicit sequential time. This fully compensates for 0% schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'Fit Duong decline model' and explains the model's applicability to fracture-dominated flow in unconventionals, distinguishing it from other decline models like Arps or PLE.

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?

Hints at when to use (unconventional/shale reservoirs) but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or state when not to use. Lacks prerequisites or exclusion criteria.

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