veroq_ask

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description details return structure (structured data, LLM summary, trade signal, confidence, follow-ups), cost (1-5 credits), caching (60s/30s), and fast flag behavior. No contradictions with annotations.

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 uses clear headers (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLES, CONSTRAINTS) and front-loads the importance. It is informative but slightly verbose; however, each section earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description comprehensively covers returns, cost, caching, constraints, and gives concrete examples. For a tool with 41 intents and many sibling tools, this provides sufficient context for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by explaining the 'fast' parameter's effect (skip LLM summary, save ~2 seconds) and the 'question' parameter's scope. This enhances understanding beyond the schema descriptions.

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 it is the default tool for natural language questions about finance, markets, and economics, automatically detecting 41 intents. It distinguishes itself from numerous sibling tools by being the first resort and covering a wide range of queries.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Use this FIRST before reaching for specialized tools' and provides WHEN TO USE context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or which sibling tools to use for specific intents, though examples and constraints offer implicit guidance.

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