cognition_wheel

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

Lacks annotations, so description carries full burden. Describes parallel consultation and synthesis, but omits details like latency, cost, result format, or behavior of internet search. Adequate but not thorough.

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 succinct sentences, front-loaded with essential information. Every word earns its place.

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 or annotations. Description does not explain return value structure, error handling, or behavior when internet search is enabled. Significant gaps for a tool with three required parameters.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage). Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, such as how 'enable_internet_search' affects processing. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 consults three AI models in parallel and synthesizes results into a single answer. It uses specific verbs and identifies the resource (three distinct models), making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly recommends use for 'complex questions requiring deep analysis and verification,' providing clear context. No alternatives or exclusions are given, but given no siblings, this is sufficient.

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