How should tool invocation be represented to the agent?

• A. A natural language sentence describing action.
• B. As a set of file paths to tool scripts.
• C. With a standardized interface that specifies the tool name, inputs, and the expected outputs.
• D. As a graphical diagram.

Answer: (C)

Tool invocation for an agent should be represented with a standardized interface that clearly specifies the tool name, the inputs to provide, and the outputs the tool will return. This creates a precise contract the agent can rely on, enabling correct tool selection, input validation, and consistent result handling across different tools and environments. A natural language sentence describing the action, while easy for humans to read, leaves ambiguity for the agent about which tool to run or how to format inputs. A set of file paths to tool scripts points to code but doesn’t define a consistent way to invoke the tool or describe required inputs and outputs, leading to portability and reliability issues. A graphical diagram, though helpful for humans, isn’t readily machine-parsable for automated invocation without extra interpretation layers. With a standardized interface, the agent can reliably invoke tools, expect defined inputs, and receive well-defined outputs, enabling robust orchestration.