SimpleFunctions

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses 'Read-only' (safety), 'no auth' (permissions), and 'no parameters' (invocation constraints). Also clarifies return scope ('only the edge list'). Missing minor details like rate limits or data freshness, but covers all critical behavioral traits.

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?

Efficiently structured: main clause defines purpose and domain, followed by three short factual statements (read-only, no auth, no params), and ends with sibling differentiation. Zero redundancy despite high information density.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool, description adequately covers invocation constraints and return type ('edge list'). Without output schema, could slightly improve by hinting at edge list structure, but sibling comparison provides sufficient scope clarification for tool selection.

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?

Zero parameters present (empty schema), which per rubric establishes baseline 4. Description confirms 'no parameters,' aligning with schema and ensuring the agent doesn't attempt to infer hidden parameters.

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?

Defines the specific resource (mispricings/edges across public theses) and clarifies domain terminology ('contracts where the platform's causal model disagrees with market price'). Explicitly distinguishes from sibling get_context by contrasting 'only the edge list' vs bundled data.

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?

Provides explicit alternative: 'use get_context for edges bundled with movers, highlights, and world state.' The phrase 'Returns *only* the edge list' clearly signals when NOT to use this tool (when comprehensive context is needed).

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