list_fitting_functions

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates that the tool lists information and returns a JSON. No side effects or destructive behavior is implied, and the read-only nature is evident. The only minor gap is not explicitly stating that it requires no input, but the schema already shows zero 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 extremely concise: two sentences, no redundant information. The first sentence defines purpose, the second describes the return format. Every word is necessary.

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 annotations, and an existing output schema, the description provides a high-level summary of the return value. It is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's basic functionality, though more detailed structural info is likely in the output schema.

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 tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% by default. The description adds value by explaining the output structure (JSON grouped by category with parameter names). Since there are no parameters to describe, this is fully adequate.

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 action 'List' and the resource 'available built-in fitting functions and their parameters'. It is specific and easily distinguishable from sibling tools which are mostly about creation, modification, or export.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the context is clear for a listing tool; it serves as a reference before using curve_fit. No exclusions or when-not-to-use indications are given, which is acceptable for a simple read operation.

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