Qvac Index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states it's a curated map and to call it first. It does not disclose whether it's read-only, what the return format is, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that presumably returns data to guide subsequent actions.

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 short sentences with zero waste. It front-loads the core purpose ('Curated map') and immediately gives the usage directive. Every word contributes value.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains the tool's role and its relation to qvac_fetch. It could optionally mention that the result is a list of URLs or something similar, but given the simplicity and the clear chaining instruction, it is sufficiently complete.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so per guidelines the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information because there are none to describe.

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 provides a curated map of QVAC's functions and where to read about them. It distinguishes itself by instructing to call it before qvac_fetch, implying it's a starting point. However, it doesn't explicitly name the alternative tools it complements, though the sibling list implies this.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'Call first, then qvac_fetch(url).' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke it relative to qvac_fetch. It doesn't mention when not to use it or alternative scenarios, but the directive is clear for the primary workflow.

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