run_nodal_analysis

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

The description discloses the models used (Vogel IPR and simplified vertical lift model). However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not elaborate on limitations, assumptions, or side effects. It is adequate but not detailed.

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 a paragraph followed by a list. It is reasonably concise but the Args section could be integrated more tightly. The purpose is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has an output schema (not shown), but the description does not mention what the tool returns. No annotations exist to cover safety or behavior. For a calculation tool, this leaves some gaps.

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 adds value beyond the input schema by providing units and brief descriptions for each parameter (e.g., 'reservoir_pressure: Average reservoir pressure in psi'). The schema only has titles and types.

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 that the tool performs simplified nodal analysis to find the IPR/VLP intersection for an operating point. It is distinct from sibling tools which are mostly other calculations.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, not when to use it or when not to.

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