logical_argument_analyzer

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

Describes output (markdown analysis) and scope (four aspects plus optional recommendations). No annotations provided; description covers reasonable behavioral context without needing to mention side effects since it's a read-only analysis tool.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Efficiently conveys core functionality and usage guidance.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and distinguishes from siblings. Adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions. Description adds context: 'comprehensive' runs all four, and mentions markdown output. Does not deeply explain each parameter beyond schema, but provides useful extra info.

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?

Clearly states the tool assesses structure, validity, strength, and fallacies. Returns a markdown analysis. Differentiates from sibling 'logical_fallacy_detector'.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this for overall argument quality; to only flag and name fallacies use logical_fallacy_detector.' Provides clear context and alternative.

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