Ask VenuVidya — the in-app RAG chatbot. Returns a grounded answer + citations.
Args:
question: Student question (2-1500 chars).
level: Optional level filter for retrieval ('junior' | 'senior' | 'vidwat').
language: 'en', 'kn' or 'auto'.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| level | No | ||
| language | No | auto | |
| question | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must compensate. It states the tool returns grounded answers with citations, but does not detail read-only nature, authentication requirements, or behavior under failure (e.g., no good answer). Some traits are implied 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?
Two concise sentences plus an Arg list. Front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value, no waste. Ideal length for quick comprehension.
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, the description should detail return structure (beyond 'grounded answer + citations'). Missing info on error responses, pagination if any, or behavior for empty results. Context signals show 3 params, 1 required, but description covers them adequately. Could be more 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 coverage is 0%, so description adds crucial constraints: question character limit (2-1500), level filter (junior/senior/vidwat), and language options (en, kn, auto). These go beyond the schema which only names parameters. Still missing expected value constraints for level (null or string) and language defaults.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'Ask' and resource 'VenuVidya' (the in-app RAG chatbot), clearly distinct from sibling tools that deal with classes, lessons, practice, and syllabus.
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?
Tool's purpose as a Q&A chatbot is clear, and sibling tools cover different domains, so when to use it is implicitly understood. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: ask_venuvidya is a RAG chatbot, search_syllabus is keyword search, list/get_lesson and list/get_class handle distinct resources, and log_practice_session writes practice data. No two tools have overlapping responsibilities.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (ask, get, list, log, search). Even 'ask_venuvidya' uses a verb + proper noun, matching the style. Naming is predictable and scannable.
Seven tools cover the core flows of a study guide: browsing lessons, searching content, logging practice, and retrieving class journals. This is well-scoped—not too sparse, not bloated.
The surface covers viewing lessons and classes, searching, and logging practice, but lacks write operations for lessons or classes (e.g., annotating or updating). However, the server's role is a study guide, and the missing operations are not essential for its stated purpose.