plan_research_workflow

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

No annotations provided, but description fully details the output structure including fields like intent_summary, suggested_topic, clarifying_questions, next_call, and estimated_duration_sec. No mention of side effects, but tool appears non-destructive.

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?

Well-structured with bullet points and examples. Front-loaded main purpose. Slightly verbose but all content relevant.

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?

Covers input, output fields (though not formal schema), and usage flow. Does not detail error handling or edge cases, but adequate for a planning tool with one parameter.

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?

Single parameter 'user_intent' with no schema description. Description adds value by explaining expected input as freeform intent and providing examples, compensating for schema coverage gap.

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?

Clear verb 'convert' and resource 'freeform user intent into a structured research plan'. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling auto_research_topic by stating order of use.

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 scenarios (vague, ambitious, potential cluster collisions) and gives example user statements. Clearly states to call before auto_research_topic and specifies confirmation flow.

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