SF_Compt

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses parameter constraints (Z range 1-120, q unit 1/Angstrom) and implies a read-only calculation with no side effects. However, it does not specify the return format or any potential edge cases.

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 extremely concise: two brief sentences plus an arg list. Every word is essential, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 that an output schema exists (context signal true), the description does not need to explain return values. For a simple two-parameter calculation, the description provides sufficient context including parameter constraints and units.

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 0%, so the description must explain both parameters. It clearly defines Z as atomic number (1-120) and q as momentum transfer in 1/Angstrom, adding meaning beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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 'Calculate the Compton incoherent scattering function', providing a clear verb and resource. The tool name SF_Compt matches this purpose, and it is distinct from sibling tools that compute related quantities like cross sections (CS_Compt) or form factors (FF_Rayl).

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as CS_Compt for cross sections or ComptonProfile. While the purpose is clear, there is no context about prerequisites or exclusions, limiting the agent's ability to select among similar tools.

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