commerce_cross_agent_insight

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

The description adds useful context about auth and scoping ('under your JWT, tenant, and company scope'), which is beyond the annotations. It does not disclose potential side effects, but the annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, so the agent has this signal. No contradiction found.

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 short, front-loaded with the key purpose, and uses a clean Args block. Every sentence adds some information, though the parameter details are thin.

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?

The description is incomplete for a generic domain-agent action. An agent is not told what `cross_agent_insight` is meant to accomplish, how the action interacts with other commerce tools, or what kind of return/output to expect. The output schema helps, but the behavior and action intent remain unclear.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry the parameter meaning, but it only says message is a 'free-text objective' and inputs is an 'optional JSON string'. It does not explain what the structured inputs for the cross_agent_insight action should contain or how they are interpreted.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Run the commerce domain agent action `cross_agent_insight`'. It also adds routing context. However, it does not define what the `cross_agent_insight` action actually does or distinguish it from sibling commerce tools like commerce_converse or commerce_chat.

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 explains how the tool is routed (via the domain-agent dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope) but gives no guidance on when to use it, when not to use it, or what alternatives exist. An agent cannot determine why this tool should be chosen over any other commerce agent action.

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