diagnostics

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that a diagnostic report is collected, but fails to disclose whether the tool is destructive, requires user consent, or overwrites files at the output path. There is no mention of side effects or access requirements.

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 a single, clear sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and fits the simplicity of the tool.

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 has a single optional parameter and no output schema, the description is too brief. It lacks details about the output (e.g., format, location), behavior (e.g., archiving, cleanup), and prerequisites (e.g., simulator must be running). The agent may miss critical context for correct invocation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage with a single parameter 'outputPath' and a clear description. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but given full coverage, the baseline is 3. The description does hint that the output is an archive, which provides mild additional context.

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 that the tool collects a diagnostic report from the simulator subsystem, using the verb 'collect' and the resource 'diagnostic report from the simulator subsystem'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like log_collect or screenshot, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 usage guidance is provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use log_collect vs diagnostics), nor are there preconditions or postconditions described. The agent must infer the purpose.

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