explain_dial

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only action ('explain') but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, idempotent, or requires no special permissions.

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 (one sentence, 10 words) and front-loaded with the verb. However, it could be more informative without increasing length, e.g., by stating the return type.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and minimal description, the tool definition lacks completeness. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., text, object), how errors are handled, or that 'dial' likely refers to a key from 'get_dials' output.

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 for the single required parameter 'dial'. The description adds that the parameter identifies the dial to explain, but does not specify allowed values, format, or provide examples. The description partially compensates but lacks sufficient detail.

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 'explain what a dial means and how each value band changes behavior', which is a distinct verb+resource compared to siblings like 'get_dials' or 'set_dial'. However, it assumes domain knowledge about what a 'dial' is without further definition.

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 like 'get_dials' (which likely returns current values) or 'apply_preset'. The description does not specify contextual usage conditions.

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