content_plan_domain_intelligence

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions routing through a dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope but does not disclose side effects (e.g., read-only vs mutation), error behavior, or any rate limits.

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 concise at four lines plus arg list, front-loading the main purpose. It wastes no words, but could slightly improve structure by separating the action description from routing details.

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 that an output schema exists but is not shown, and the tool has many siblings with similar patterns, the description does not explain the output or provide sufficient context for an agent to understand its role or when to invoke it. Missing details on what the action produces or its prerequisites.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds brief explanations for both parameters: 'message' as free-text objective and 'inputs' as optional JSON string. However, it does not describe expected format or provide examples, limiting the added value.

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 that the tool runs a content domain agent action called 'plan_domain_intelligence', but it does not explain what this action accomplishes. The verb is clear but the resource/outcome is vague, and it does not differentiate from many similar siblings like 'commerce_plan_domain_intelligence' or 'crm_plan_domain_intelligence'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or how it compares to other content tools such as 'content_analyze_results' or 'content_chat'.

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