Run Autoresearch

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=true. The description adds context about the loop, checks, and mutation, but does not detail what gets destroyed, required permissions, or reversibility. Provides moderate added value beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is concise but uses technical jargon ('bounded metric-improvement loop', 'holdout checks') that may reduce clarity. No wasted words, but could be more accessible.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, and destructive hint, the description only gives a high-level process. It omits details about researchQuery, paperLimit, timeoutMs, and expected output. Adequate but has clear gaps for a complex tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond parameter names; it is a general overview. No additional parameter semantics.

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 runs a 'bounded metric-improvement loop' with specific steps (baseline, hypothesis, checks, keep/discard). The verb 'run' and resource 'autoresearch' are specific, but it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'run_harness' or 'run_self_distill'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_harness or other optimization tools. No mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or appropriate contexts.

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