recompute_verdicts

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behaviors: background execution, cost visibility with estimated_credits, no upfront charge, actual metering, and error condition (503). Comprehensive.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with main action. No extraneous sentences. Each sentence adds value (cost, error, background). Efficient.

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?

Covers behavior (background), cost (credits, no pre-charge), error (503), and next step (re-read report). Output schema exists so return format is covered. Complete for a tool with no annotations.

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 coverage is 50% (model_id described, server_version not). Description does not explain server_version or add semantics beyond schema. Fails to compensate for missing schema description.

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?

Description uses specific verbs 'Re-run' and 'Enqueues' with clear resource 'coverage and group-sufficiency verdict evaluation'. It distinguishes from sibling get_recompute_quote by mentioning pre-flight quote. Purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Provides context: bypasses quiet-period batching, runs in background, advises to re-read report later. Mentions 503 error for unavailability. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use conditions but context is adequate.

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