DCSP_Compt

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states the calculation but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as input validation, error handling, performance characteristics, or side effects. The agent cannot predict tool behavior beyond the basic function.

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: one sentence stating purpose followed by a parameter list. It front-loads the key information. However, the parameter list partially duplicates the schema, though it adds value with units and ranges.

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 computational purpose but lacks usage context, limitations, or behavioral details. Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, many siblings) and absence of annotations, more contextual information would be needed for safe and correct invocation. However, the presence of an output schema partially mitigates the need for return value documentation.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the parameter list in the description adds crucial semantic details: units (keV, radians), allowed range for Z (1-120), and explicit mapping of Greek letters to parameter names. This compensates fully for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Calculate' and the resource 'polarized differential Compton scattering cross section' with units. It differentiates this tool from sibling tools like DCS_Compt (non-polarized) and CS_Compt (total cross section) through the term 'polarized'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. With many similar sibling tools (e.g., DCSP_Rayl, DCS_Compt), the agent lacks context for selection. No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisites are mentioned.

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