calculate_result

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states what the tool does (calculates result) but does not indicate side effects, state changes, permission requirements, or the nature of the output. This is a critical gap for a tool that likely operates on a session.

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 short phrase with no wasted words, which is concise in form. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, providing only a bare action without context or structure, similar to the 'Process' example.

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 the lack of annotations, no output schema, and a single undocumented nested parameter, the description carries full responsibility for completeness. It fails to explain what the final test result is, how it is computed, what the return value looks like, or any required session structure, making it grossly inadequate.

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 shows one required 'session' object with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain what 'session' should contain or how it relates to calculating the result. The agent is left with no information to construct a valid session object, making correct invocation impossible.

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 '计算最终测试结果' clearly states the tool calculates the final test result, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_progress' or 'answer_question', which might also involve result-related actions, so it lacks explicit distinction.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or why one would choose 'calculate_result' over 'get_progress' or other siblings, leaving the agent with no context for appropriate invocation.

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