lookup_term

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

With no annotations, the description only says 'private or curated', implying restricted access, but does not disclose behaviors like read-only nature, error handling for missing terms, or side effects. The minimal description leaves significant ambiguity.

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 a single efficient sentence with no redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded but could benefit from a second sentence about output or usage.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description omits crucial context: what the tool returns (definition, metadata?), error conditions (term not found), and whether it modifies state. This leaves the agent guessing about the response format.

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% for the single parameter 'text', which already has a clear description. The tool's description adds 'private or curated lexical/domain term' as qualifier but it does not enhance parameter semantics beyond the schema baseline.

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 verb 'look up' and the resource 'private or curated lexical/domain term'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'explain_term' and 'normalize_tokens' by specifying the scope of terms (private/curated domain-specific).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., explain_term) is provided. The description does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it.

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