research_digest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses concurrency limits (up to 30 URLs in parallel), cache semantics for max_age, and the meaning of refresh. It could say a bit more about side effects or prerequisites, but the core behavior is well covered.

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 dense but not bloated; it front-loads the core purpose, then explains parameters and usage conditions. Some phrasing is repeated, but every sentence provides functional value. The all-caps sections make navigation easy.

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 3-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it covers purpose, parameter semantics, when to use, when not to use, and alternatives. The availability of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values. No obvious gap remains for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It thoroughly explains refresh (rebuild digests and recheck liveness, up to 30 URLs) and max_age (freshness in seconds, 0 = full recheck, 86400 = TTL cache). camp_id is not explicitly defined, but its meaning is inferable from context.

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 tool produces short digest packages (title + first paragraph, ~700 chars) plus a liveness status for each source, using a quality gate pattern. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming citation_report and research_status as alternatives in the 'НЕ КОГДА' section.

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 'КОГДА' and 'НЕ КОГДА' sections: use when the campaign is done; do not use when full Markdown is needed (use citation_report) or when the campaign is still running (use research_status/wait). Also explains when refresh is unnecessary for background campaigns.

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