spss_frequencies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates the return value and the IBM SPSS installation requirement, but it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or whether it can modify the dataset.

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 two focused sentences with no filler. It front-loads the command and outcome, then adds a necessary prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place.

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 output schema covers return-value structure, but with no annotations and sparse parameter descriptions, the description leaves gaps around accepted statistics values, file_path semantics, and variable requirements. It is adequate for a simple frequency call but incomplete for nuanced usage.

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 schema contains no descriptions for any parameter, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that variables are one or more and that statistics are optional, but it does not define which statistic values are accepted, the file_path format, or variable type constraints.

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 names the exact SPSS command ('FREQUENCIES') and the resource ('one or more variables'), and clearly states the output as frequency tables with counts, percentages, and optional statistics. This distinguishes it from siblings like descriptives, crosstabs, and regression.

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 implies the tool is for generating frequency distributions, which is a clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over descriptives or crosstabs, nor does it provide exclusions such as continuous variables or missing data handling.

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