Patent PreCheck — start an Interactive Code Review

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the result (URL) but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, preconditions, or failure modes. For a tool that likely initiates a process, this is insufficient.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of 12 words. It efficiently communicates the core action and optionality. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

For a simple tool that returns a URL, the description covers the essential function. However, missing usage guidelines and behavioral context reduce completeness. Given the schema covers parameters, the description is minimally adequate but not rich.

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 each parameter. The description adds value by stating that the promo code is for skipping payment, which clarifies purpose beyond the schema. This is useful context that helps the agent select parameters correctly.

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 action ('Return the URL') and the resource ('Interactive Code Review'), with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate this tool from its siblings, which all start with 'precheck_'. A 5 would require distinct positioning against alternatives.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the 11 sibling tools. There are no context cues, exclusions, or alternative indications. The agent is left without information to decide if this is the appropriate tool.

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