intuit_plan_domain_intelligence

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool routes through a dispatcher and requires certain scopes, but it does not describe side effects, idempotency, or whether the action is read-only or mutating. The behavioral insight beyond the 'run' verb is minimal.

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 very concise: three sentences plus a two-parameter list. It is front-loaded with the primary action and efficiently conveys the necessary information without extraneous content.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description covers the action, auth context, and parameters. However, it does not describe what 'plan_domain_intelligence' does beyond running it, leaving the agent to infer from the name. Behavioral gaps are not addressed.

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 explain parameters. It describes 'message' as a free-text objective and 'inputs' as an optional JSON string for structured inputs. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type definitions, though it could include examples or validation constraints.

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 runs the 'intuit domain agent action `plan_domain_intelligence`'. It identifies the specific resource and verb, distinguishing it from sibling tools with similar names by specifying the 'intuit domain' scope.

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 mentions routing through the platform's domain-agent dispatcher under JWT, tenant, and company scope, providing context about authorization. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusion criteria. The guidance is implicit from the name.

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