fibonacci_init

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only lists parameters but does not explain what 'initialization' entails (e.g., does it set internal state? Does it have side effects?), nor does it mention required authentication or resource impact.

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?

Single sentence, clear, front-loaded with the action and resource. No unnecessary words or extraneous details.

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?

Without annotations or output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain the Fibonacci betting strategy, what a 'session' means, or how subsequent tools (fibonacci_record, etc.) relate. An agent needs more context to use this tool effectively among many init tools.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds that maxIndex is optional, which is already in the schema. No additional semantic value beyond confirming the parameters' role in initializing a session.

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 uses the specific verb 'Initialize' and resource 'Fibonacci betting session', clearly distinguishing this tool from sibling init tools for other strategies (e.g., martingale_init, cocomo_init). It states exactly what the tool does.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to choose Fibonacci over other strategies). It does not mention prerequisites or post-conditions, leaving the agent with no decision context.

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