explain_fix_tag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool performs a read operation and returns specific data (field name, data type, enumerated values). However, it does not mention error handling (e.g., for unknown tags) or any potential side effects, though for a simple lookup the provided information is largely adequate.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose and return data. However, it lacks details about error scenarios or the exact structure of the output, which could be helpful. Overall, it is largely complete but not exhaustive.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'a FIX tag' without explaining the parameter's meaning, valid range, or format. This lack of parameter detail leaves ambiguity about what constitutes a valid tag (e.g., integer range).

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 function: looking up a FIX tag's field name, data type, and enumerated values. The verb 'look up' and resource 'FIX tag' are specific and distinguish it from sibling tools that operate on entire messages.

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 usage when one needs metadata about a FIX tag, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any prerequisites or exclusions. The sibling tools have different purposes, so confusion is unlikely, but explicit guidance is missing.

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