claude_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'server-side web search' and the return format, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or any side effects, nor does it mention authentication, rate limits, or error conditions.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the core purpose and output without any extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

Despite having 4 parameters and no annotation, the description lacks details on parameter usage, return format beyond 'answer + cited URLs', and behavioral context. The output schema exists but is not detailed in the prompt, and the description does not compensate for the missing annotations.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not explain any parameters. While the schema defines parameters like question, model, system_prompt, and max_tokens, the description adds no meaning beyond the raw schema names, leaving the agent without guidance on how to set them.

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 identifies the verb 'ask', the resource 'Claude (with server-side web search)', and the output 'answer + cited URLs'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like gemini_query or openai_query by specifying both the model and the web search capability.

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 implies usage for asking questions with web search, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gemini_query or perplexity_query, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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