SimpleFunctions

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

Since no annotations exist, the description carries full burden and discloses: 'Read-only, no auth' (safety), token count estimates (performance), and filtering behavior (only changed markets). Could improve by mentioning cache headers or empty response behavior, but covers critical traits well.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with core functionality, followed by performance comparison, then usage guidelines. Every clause earns its place—no filler or tautology.

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 2-parameter polling tool without output schema, description adequately covers return characteristics (diff format, token size, filtering). Missing only minor details like error handling when no changes exist, but sufficient for correct agent invocation given the simplicity.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for both 'since' (duration formats) and 'format' (enum values). The description mentions 'since a given timestamp' aligning with the schema but adds no additional param syntax or examples beyond the schema. Baseline 3 appropriate when schema is comprehensive.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Incremental diff of the world model' with specific scope 'only the markets whose probability moved.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling get_world_state by contrasting token counts (~30-50 vs ~800) and use cases (polling vs snapshot).

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 when-to-use guidance: 'Use this for cheap polling loops; use get_world_state for an absolute snapshot.' Names the specific alternative tool and explains the trade-off (token efficiency), giving the agent clear decision criteria.

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