sprinkler_plan

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only hints at output (materials and affordability check) without details on side effects, limitations, or return format. The output schema exists but the description does not complement it.

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?

Single sentence covering core functionality. No unnecessary words. Could be slightly more structured, but effective.

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 covers the main purpose but omits details like output interpretation or edge cases. Given the output schema exists, it is partially complete but leaves the agent to infer return values.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description ties parameters together but adds minimal new semantic meaning beyond what is already in the schema (e.g., tiles, sprinkler type).

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's purpose: providing sprinkler and material requirements to water a given number of tiles, and checking affordability. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling planning tools like crop_planner or processing_planner.

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 other planning tools. The description lacks context about prerequisites, alternatives, 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.