simulate_recovery_action

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

Given no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states 'simulate' implying no actual state change, but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, mention any side effects, or describe the output format. Lack of annotation makes this a significant gap.

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?

A single sentence of 13 words that immediately conveys the core action. Every word serves a purpose with no redundancy or extraneous detail.

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?

The description provides the essential idea for a straightforward simulation tool. However, it omits what the simulation returns (e.g., predicted metrics) and any conditions under which the simulation is valid. Given the lack of output schema, this information is necessary for complete understanding.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by mapping 'N agents' to the agents parameter, 'source queue' and 'target queue' to source and target, and 'duration (minutes)' to minutes. However, it does not specify valid values or constraints such as queue name format or integer ranges.

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 simulates moving a number of agents from one queue to another for a specified duration. This verb+resource combination is distinct from sibling tools which focus on capacity, forecasts, and intraday metrics.

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 instructions are provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_available_capacity or get_intraday_snapshot. The description does not specify prerequisites or typical use cases.

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