median

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the calculation purpose without any behavioral context: no information about input validation (e.g., handling empty arrays, non-numeric values), error conditions, performance characteristics, or output format. This is inadequate for a tool with undocumented parameters.

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, efficient sentence in Chinese that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately front-loaded with the core functionality.

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?

For a statistical calculation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and 1 parameter, the description is completely inadequate. It lacks essential information about parameter requirements, behavioral expectations, error handling, and output format that would be needed for reliable use.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema), and the description provides no parameter information beyond the name 'numbers'. It doesn't explain what type of array elements are expected (numbers only?), whether the array must be sorted, or any constraints on array size or values.

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 '计算数组的中位数' (calculates the median of an array) clearly states the verb ('计算' - calculate) and resource ('数组的中位数' - median of an array). It distinguishes from siblings like 'mean' or 'mode' by specifying the statistical measure. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all mathematical/statistical siblings beyond the name itself.

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 'mean', 'mode', or other statistical functions. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate or what distinguishes it contextually from similar tools in the sibling list.

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