spss_declare_variables

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It says the tool declares new empty variables, but it does not state whether this modifies the file in place, whether existing variables are affected, whether output_path controls a new file, or what happens to the dataset after declaration. The IBM SPSS prerequisite is the only non-obvious behavioral detail.

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: the core action comes first, followed by the parameter shape and a one-line prerequisite. Every sentence contributes, though the last sentence about IBM SPSS Statistics is more of a system requirement than an action guideline.

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?

For a simple declaration tool this is mostly adequate, but with 4 parameters and no annotations, the description should clarify what file_path refers to and what output_path controls. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the missing I/O semantics and lack of usage guidance leave noticeable 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the two main dictionaries, numeric_vars and string_vars, with the expected {name: format} shape and examples. However, it does not explain file_path or output_path, including what output_path=null means or whether file_path is the input .sav file.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Declare new empty variables', and immediately clarifies the two supported kinds (NUMERIC and STRING) with example formats. This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like spss_compute or spss_recode, which transform existing variables rather than declaring new empty ones.

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 description states a prerequisite ('Requires IBM SPSS Statistics') but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as spss_compute, spss_recode, or spss_variable_labels. There is no mention of when not to use it or what distinguishes this declaration step from other variable-manipulation tools.

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