CSb_Compt_CP

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

The description only states what it calculates and the units. With no annotations, it should disclose more behavioral traits (e.g., input validation, edge cases, return format). The existence of an output schema may cover return values, but the description itself is thin.

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 concise with a clear purpose sentence followed by parameter explanations. No unnecessary words, front-loaded effectively.

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 tool has only 2 parameters, an output schema, and a straightforward calculation, the description is minimally complete. However, it lacks context on input constraints and differentiation from siblings, which would improve completeness.

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 description adds meaning to both parameters: compound is a chemical formula with examples, E is photon energy in keV. Since schema coverage is 0%, this is helpful, but it lacks details like valid range for E or compound format requirements.

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 it calculates the Compton scattering cross section of a compound in barn/atom. The verb 'Calculate' and resource are specific. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like CS_Compt_CP (which may be for elements), but the compound focus is explicit.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the many siblings (e.g., CSb_Compt, CS_Compt_CP). The agent must infer from the name and description that this is for compounds, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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