Veroq

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses critical behavioral traits: async nature ('Kicks off async generation'), credit cost ('5 credits'), tier requirements ('Deep tier requires paid plan'), and return value structure ('Report ID, ticker, tier, and status'). Lacks only error handling or validation behavior details.

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?

Excellent structure with clear headers (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE). Front-loaded with purpose statement, followed by workflow context, then technical details. No filler text; every sentence provides actionable information for tool selection and invocation.

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, but description fully compensates by documenting return fields and the critical next-step instruction to use veroq_get_report. Includes cost transparency essential for a credit-based API. Complete for an async job-initiation tool.

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 value via concrete JSON example showing valid tier values and format. Also clarifies cost implications of tier parameter ('Deep tier requires paid plan') which schema doesn't convey.

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 ('Generate') + resource ('AI-powered research report') + scope ('for a ticker'). Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool veroq_ticker_analysis by contrasting 'polished, shareable research report' vs 'instant inline analysis', and references veroq_get_report for retrieval flow.

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?

Contains explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section stating the specific use case ('polished, shareable research report') and directly names the alternative tool for different needs (veroq_ticker_analysis). Also clarifies the async workflow requiring veroq_get_report to retrieve results.

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