deepseek_explain

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does state the primary behavior—returning an explanation at a chosen level—and the schema adds the DeepThink toggle, but it does not describe output format, length expectations, or whether any external side effects exist.

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?

One tight sentence that puts the main action and object first, with no filler or redundant boilerplate. Every phrase contributes to understanding what the tool does.

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 simple tool with one required parameter and a fully documented schema, the description is mostly complete. The only real gap is the lack of explicit sibling differentiation and an output-shape statement, but these are relatively minor given the tool's low complexity.

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 documents all three parameters with 100% coverage, including valid enum values and defaults. The description adds little beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific action (explain) and a clear resource scope (concept, code snippet, or text), plus a distinguishing feature (difficulty level). It is broadly clear, but it does not explicitly contrast with close siblings like deepseek_summarize or deepseek_chat, leaving some ambiguity.

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 use for explanation-style queries, which is distinct from debugging or code review, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings. An agent would have to infer the boundary between 'explain' and 'summarize' or 'chat'.

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