tyi_chat

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

The description notes the tool is 'SLOW', which is a useful behavioral hint, but with no annotations, it fails to disclose other aspects like response format, error behavior, or rate limits. It covers the most critical aspect for a chat tool (slowness) but lacks broader context.

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 extremely concise (two sentences), front-loads the key caveat ('SLOW'), and every word adds value. No redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (two params, no output schema), the description covers scope, exclusions, and a behavioral warning. It does not explain the return value or the reset parameter's effect, but for a chat tool the output is implied.

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 description adds value beyond the schema by specifying allowed topics for the message parameter ('Balance, send, pay, policy'), which is not present in the schema's bare description. The reset parameter lacks detail, but the higher coverage of the main parameter compensates.

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 uses a specific verb ('SLOW brain agent') and explicitly lists the allowed operations (balance, send, pay, etc.) and prohibited ones, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like tyi_create_wallet.

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 explicitly states when to use (for the listed topics) and when not to use (create, import, onboard, etc.), providing direct alternatives ('use dedicated tyi_* tools instead').

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