tickory_describe_indicators

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates this is a read-only introspection tool with no side effects. It explicitly lists the types of entities described (variables, guards, ranges, examples), providing sufficient transparency.

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 sentence that conveys all necessary information without superfluous words. Every element (variables, guards, ranges, examples) earns its place.

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 presence of an output schema (indicated by context signals), the description need not detail return values. It covers the key types of described elements. However, it could optionally hint at the output structure or when to expect empty results, but the current level is sufficient.

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 covers the one parameter (contract_type) with enum and description. The tool's description adds meaningful context: 'Defaults to perp so the full variable set is visible.' This clarifies the default behavior and why the default is chosen, enriching the schema's information.

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 uses a specific verb ('Describe') and resource ('CEL variables, guards, ranges, and example expressions available for Tickory scan rules'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like tickory_create_scan or tickory_run_scan, which focus on execution rather than metadata exploration.

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 context (before creating a scan rule), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided, though the tool's self-documenting nature partially compensates.

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