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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals that answers include citations ('ตอบโดยอ้างลิงก์หน้าต้นทางด้วย'), but does not disclose whether results are exact matches or fuzzy, or whether pagination exists. Mentions '58 ข้อ' implying a fixed set, but not explicit.

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 sentence covering purpose, usage guideline, and citation behavior. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate sentences for purpose and guidelines).

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns beyond citations. It mentions citation links but not the result format (e.g., list of Q&A pairs). Adequate for a simple search tool but could be more comprehensive.

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% for the single query parameter. The description provides a usage tip: use single words or short phrases for better results ('คำสั้นเจอมากกว่าประโยคยาว'), which adds value beyond schema constraints.

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 tool searches official CODENIVERSE Q&A covering specific topics (service conditions, duration, price, hiring, after-delivery care). It differentiates from siblings by emphasizing it's for official company Q&A and should be used before answering conditional questions.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this tool before answering company conditional questions ('ใช้ก่อนตอบคำถามเชิงเงื่อนไขของบริษัทเสมอ'). This provides clear when-to-use guidance and implies alternatives like search_articles are for other contexts.

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