spss_aggregate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the IBM SPSS Statistics requirement and shows the generated syntax, but it does not mention file creation/overwrite behavior, handling of missing values, or what happens when break_variables is null.

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 compact and front-loaded with the tool's purpose, followed by syntax and a precise aggregation list format. Every sentence contributes useful information, though the SPSS syntax shorthand is terse for non-SPSS users.

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 core call shape is present: BREAK variables, aggregation functions, source variables, and the SPSS dependency. The output schema presumably covers return values, but side effects such as output file behavior and null break_variables semantics are left ambiguous, making the description adequate rather than complete.

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%, but the description adds valuable semantics for the aggregations parameter, including new_var, function enum, and source. It does not explain file_path, output_path, or the null break_variables case beyond the SPSS /BREAK syntax, so compensation is only partial.

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 opens with 'Group-wise summaries' and provides the SPSS AGGREGATE syntax plus an enumeration of supported functions, making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It differentiates itself from sibling analysis/transform tools by describing an aggregation operation, though it does not explicitly name a sibling it is not.

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?

The phrase 'Group-wise summaries' implies the intended use case, but the description gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as descriptives or frequencies. No exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions are provided.

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