data_processor

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'process,' which implies computation but does not state that the tool is non-destructive, pure, or specify return values. The operation enum hints at behavior, but the description adds no transparency beyond the schema.

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 and front-loaded, but it is under-informative. Every word is used, but the sentence lacks substance to be truly concise; it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 tool is simple (two params, no nesting), but no output schema exists. The description fails to mention what the tool returns (e.g., a number for sum/average/max/min, or sorted array for sort). This missing information makes the description incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond restating the schema ('arrays of data' and 'various operations'). It does not elaborate on parameter formats, constraints, or relationships.

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 specifies 'Process arrays of data with various operations,' which clearly indicates the tool operates on arrays with multiple operations. The verb 'process' is generic, but combined with the schema details, the purpose is clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'calculator' which might also manipulate numbers.

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 versus alternatives. The description does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent is left to infer usage from the schema and tool name alone.

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