Veroq

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and excels: discloses COST (3 credits), RETURN structure (per-URL with title/domain/word count/text), truncation limits (2000 chars), and paywall handling behavior—critical operational details beyond the schema.

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?

Uses structured headers (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE, CONSTRAINTS) that front-load key information. Every section earns its place with zero redundancy; the formatting makes the multi-faceted constraints scannable despite the single-parameter simplicity.

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 lacking an output schema and annotations, the description comprehensively specifies return values (title, domain, word count, truncated text), cost constraints, and rate limits. For a single-parameter extraction tool, this provides complete operational context.

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% ('Comma-separated URLs to extract (max 5)'), establishing baseline 3. The description adds value via the EXAMPLE section showing actual comma-separated URL formatting and CONSTRAINTS reiterating the limit, providing practical context beyond the schema definition.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Extract') + resource ('article content from one or more URLs') + output format ('clean text'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like veroq_web_search (which searches) or veroq_crawl (which likely spiders sites).

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?

Provides explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section stating the exact scenario ('need the full text of a news article or web page for analysis') and notes paywall handling capabilities. Does not explicitly name sibling alternatives (e.g., veroq_web_search) to contrast against, which would be required for a 5.

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