Veroq

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses COST (1 credit), RETURN structure (sources with trust levels, provenance details), and content scope (counter-argument, AI/human split). Minor gap: doesn't mention idempotency, caching, or error states.

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?

Perfectly structured with labeled sections (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE). First sentence states core purpose immediately. Zero redundancy; every line adds unique information not present in structured fields.

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?

No output schema exists, so description compensates by detailing return contents (body, sources, entities, provenance). Covers cost and usage context. For a simple retrieval tool with 2 parameters, this is sufficient; minor gap on error handling or rate limit details.

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%, establishing baseline 3. Description adds significant value via EXAMPLE showing ID format ('PR-2026-0305-001'), revealing the semantic pattern/structure of brief_ids beyond the schema's generic 'string' type.

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?

Opens with specific verb ('Get') + resource ('intelligence brief') + scope ('by its ID'). Clearly distinguishes from sibling search/feed tools by emphasizing 'full details' retrieval versus discovery.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE section states the workflow dependency: 'After finding a brief via search/feed'. Names sibling alternatives directly ('search/feed'), providing clear selection criteria.

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