fibonacci_sequence

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It states the action (generate) but does not mention edge cases, default starting values (e.g., 0 and 1), or what happens with invalid input like negative count. The behavioral transparency is minimal.

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 highly concise with two sentences: one for purpose and one for parameter documentation. Every sentence serves a clear function with no unnecessary words or redundancies.

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 simplicity and the presence of an output schema (which likely documents the return format), the description is moderately complete. However, it omits key behavioral details like starting values (e.g., 0, 1) and error handling, which would help the agent anticipate output for edge cases.

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 description explicitly explains the 'count' parameter: 'Number of Fibonacci numbers (default: 10).' Since the schema provides no description (0% coverage), this adds essential meaning beyond the default value and type, helping the agent understand the parameter's role.

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 the Fibonacci sequence up to the specified count.' It uses a specific verb (Generate) and resource (Fibonacci sequence) with a clear qualifier, distinguishing it from sibling tools like factorial_calculator or prime_operations.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention limitations or prerequisites. It only describes the parameter count, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name alone.

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