propose_research_setup

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool does not create anything, only proposes names. While it does not detail the response format, the existence of an output schema and the mention of 'showing suggestions' sufficiently conveys non-destructive read-like behavior.

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 is two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and provides workflow instructions without any wasted words. Extremely efficient.

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?

Given the simplicity (single required parameter, full schema coverage, output schema exists) and the rich context of sibling creation tools, the description fully explains the tool's role in the workflow, making it complete for an AI agent.

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% with a single parameter described in the schema. The description does not add further meaning to the 'topic' parameter beyond what the schema already provides, achieving the baseline of 3.

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 the action ('propose names') and the resource ('new research collection'), and distinguishes itself from creation tools by emphasizing 'without creating anything'.

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 tells the agent to use this BEFORE creating clusters/collections/notebooks, to show suggestions to the user, and to proceed with create tools only after user confirmation. Provides clear workflow and alternatives.

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