codex_research

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the tool produces a report but does not disclose side effects, auth needs, or output format. Adequate but minimal.

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 concise with a clear docstring format listing parameters. It avoids extraneous information, though it could be slightly more structured.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema description, and moderate complexity (4 params, 3 required), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and core parameters. It lacks details on return value or behavior beyond 'produce a report', but is sufficient for basic use.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning to all three required parameters (e.g., 'high-level system guidance', 'repository/workspace directory', 'investigation topic'). The optional ctx parameter is not mentioned, but it's internal. Overall, description compensates well for lack of schema descriptions.

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 it produces an analysis report about a topic using repository code, with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools codex_execute (execution) and codex_review (review).

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 implies usage for research/analysis but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives like codex_execute or codex_review, nor any conditions for use.

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