score_creative

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by clarifying it's a 'transparent heuristic, not a proprietary prediction model', explaining the nature of the scoring logic. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences that efficiently convey purpose and nature. No fluff; each sentence is essential and 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?

Lacks output format description (no output schema). While purpose is clear, users may not know what the tool returns (e.g., scores, feedback). Adequate for a simple scoring tool but could be more 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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description connects parameters (channel, audience) to scoring dimensions (channel fit, audience fit), adding meaning beyond schema descriptions. It does not detail every parameter but links them contextually.

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 the tool scores creative content (prompt, script, ad concept) across seven specific dimensions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'score_page' by specifying creative evaluation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., audit tools). The description implies usage for creative evaluation but does not provide context for exclusion or selection among siblings.

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