ask_marketic

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose that routing can be previewed without executing, implying that execution occurs otherwise. However, it doesn't explain potential side effects, return behavior, or consequences of routing to tools that may create, launch, or schedule content.

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 short, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence earns its place: purpose, plain-language usage, example queries, and route_only guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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?

It gives enough to select the tool, but for a router with no output schema and a nested arguments object, it should clarify what the response looks like, how routing decisions are surfaced, and how arguments should be shaped. These gaps make it adequate but not fully 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?

The schema covers question and arguments descriptions, and the description adds useful examples and clarifies route_only=true as a preview mechanism. However, the arguments object remains vague—what shape it should take and how it maps to routed tools is not explained.

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 identifies the tool as a 'Master router - one entry point for Marketic' and states that it routes natural-language requests to specialist tools. This distinguishes it from the many sibling specialist tools and gives concrete examples of supported requests.

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 conveys clear context: use this as a single entry point for natural-language marketing questions or tasks, and use route_only=true to preview routing. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the router positioning makes the intended usage clear.

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