generate_strategy

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 successfully communicates several important behavioral traits: the authentication requirement (🔒 **[Requires Authentication]**), the auto-caching behavior ('🔄 Auto-Cached': 'columnAnalysis' is automatically provided from the previous analyze_source_structure step), and the functional dependency on authentication ('This tool will become fully functional after authentication'). This provides meaningful context beyond what a basic description would include.

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 appropriately sized and well-structured with clear visual markers (🔒, 🔄, ⚠️) that help scanning. Each sentence adds value: authentication requirement, purpose, workflow context, parameter guidance, and authentication reminder. While slightly repetitive on authentication, the repetition serves as emphasis rather than waste. The information is front-loaded with the most critical details first.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (workflow step with dependencies), no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description does an excellent job of providing necessary context. It explains the tool's place in a workflow, its dependencies, authentication requirements, and parameter handling. The main gap is the lack of information about what the generated strategy actually contains or looks like, but this is somewhat mitigated by the tool's name and purpose being clear.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 2 parameters, the description adds significant value. It explains that 'columnAnalysis' is 'automatically provided from the previous analyze_source_structure step' and that users should 'Only provide the 'question' parameter from the user.' This clarifies the source and handling of each parameter, which is crucial information not present in the bare schema. The description effectively compensates for the lack of schema documentation.

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's purpose: 'Generate analysis strategy for a question and column analysis' with the specific verb 'generate' and resource 'analysis strategy'. It distinguishes this as 'a granular step in the analysis workflow', which helps differentiate it from sibling tools like analyze_charts or create_dashboard. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with the most similar sibling (generate_config).

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 provides explicit usage guidance: it states this is 'a granular step in the analysis workflow' and specifies that 'columnAnalysis' is automatically provided from the previous analyze_source_structure step. It also gives clear authentication prerequisites: 'Please authenticate first by calling the setup_authentication tool above.' This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool and what must happen first.

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