qui_resolve_arr

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only states the endpoint and argument structure. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, rate limits, or response behavior, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's safety and operational impact.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the endpoint and argument convention without redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 generic schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient to fully understand the tool's purpose, valid inputs, or expected outcomes. It outlines the call structure but lacks operational context, making it incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 is a generic 'arguments' object with 0% coverage, and the description compensates by defining a clear structure: path variables directly, query values in arguments.params, and JSON body in arguments.body. This is valuable, though specific expected fields are not enumerated.

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 identifies the operation as calling the POST /arr/resolve endpoint on qui, specifying the HTTP method and resource. However, it does not explain what 'resolve' semantically does, so it is specific but not fully unambiguous.

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 instructions on how to pass arguments (path variables, query params, body) but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any use cases or exclusions.

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