ask_fastgpt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions that the tool searches the web and provides answers with references, which gives some behavioral context. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, response format, or potential side effects, leaving significant gaps for a tool that interacts with external resources.

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 that front-loads the core functionality. It avoids unnecessary words, but could be slightly improved by structuring it to highlight key actions more clearly.

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 complexity of a web search tool with no annotations, no output schema, and low parameter coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on error handling, response structure, or integration with siblings, making it inadequate for reliable agent use.

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?

The input schema has one parameter ('query') with 0% description coverage. The description adds minimal semantics by implying the query is for web search, but it doesn't specify format, length, or examples. With low schema coverage, the description doesn't adequately compensate, leaving the parameter poorly documented.

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's purpose: 'Ask fastgpt to search web and give an answer with references.' It specifies the verb ('ask'), resource ('fastgpt'), and outcome ('answer with references'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'enrich_news' or 'enrich_web' beyond implying web search functionality.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools or contexts where this tool is preferred, such as for general web queries versus news-specific enrichment. Usage is implied by the description but not explicitly stated.

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