min

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states what the tool does ('find the minimum value') without any information about error handling (e.g., empty arrays, non-numeric elements), performance characteristics, return format, or any other behavioral traits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves in practice.

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 - a single Chinese phrase that directly states the tool's function. There's no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse and understand at a glance.

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 mathematical tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. It states the basic purpose but lacks crucial information about parameter requirements, return values, error conditions, and behavioral characteristics that would be needed for an AI agent to use this tool effectively and safely.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, with one parameter 'numbers' of type array with unspecified items. The description mentions '数组' (array) but provides no additional semantic context about what the array should contain (e.g., numeric values only), format expectations, or constraints. While it implies the parameter is an array, this doesn't compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 '找出数组中的最小值' (find the minimum value in an array) clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('find') and resource ('array'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'max' (which finds the maximum value), though the names themselves provide some differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools performing mathematical operations (like 'max', 'mean', 'median'), there's no indication of when 'min' is appropriate versus other statistical tools or how it relates to them.

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