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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature (browsing catalog), lists returned fields, and scopes the tool to discovery. Missing details like pagination or rate limits, but adequate for a listing endpoint.

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?

Description is a single paragraph, front-loaded with purpose, and no wasted words. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but remains clear and efficient.

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?

No output schema, so description explains return fields in detail. Missing pagination info, but for browsing with optional filter and limit, it is sufficiently complete.

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 descriptions for limit and category are present, but the description adds value by listing all fields in each clone entry (name, era, nationality, etc.) and providing example categories. This goes beyond schema and aids selection.

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 browses a catalog of iconic figures as AI clones, listing specific fields. It distinguishes from siblings like alya_celeb_summary (celebrity summary) and alya_clone_chat (chat with clone).

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 provides use cases (research, debate prep, education, chat) but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives from the sibling list. Usage is implied but not clearly scoped.

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