Search Colours by Concept or Culture

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds the return type (named archive colours with provenance) but does not disclose rate limits, authentication needs, or other behavioral traits. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 two concise sentences with no waste. It front-loads the purpose and provides concrete examples, making it efficient for the agent to parse.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (named archive colours with provenance and cultural context) and provides example queries. The presence of an output schema further reduces the burden on the description.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds context for the 'query' parameter (abstract queries) but adds minimal detail for 'n_results' and 'archive' beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is correct.

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's purpose: to search for colours by cultural or conceptual queries. Examples like 'grief', 'Ottoman luxury' differentiate it from siblings like query_hex or colour_forensics. The verb 'Ask' and resource 'colours' are specific.

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 explicit context with abstract query examples, indicating when to use this tool over more technical alternatives. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the examples imply a semantic search scenario.

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