atlas_digest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes what the tool returns (risk movers, countries, fresh incidents) but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only, idempotency, auth requirements, or rate limits. The lack of annotation is partially compensated by the clear read-oriented intent.

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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool does and when to use it. No critical gaps are present.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no param-specific information, but none is needed. The tool is unconditional, which is evident from the empty input schema.

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 provides a daily digest of 7-day risk movers, top countries by risk, and fresh incidents. It distinguishes itself by being designed as the first call in a daily monitoring loop, setting it apart from sibling tools like atlas_timeline or atlas_risk_tiers.

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 explicitly says 'Designed as the first call of a daily monitoring loop,' indicating when to use it (daily, as starting point). It does not provide explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough for an AI agent to infer a typical daily workflow.

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