akai_capability

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior. It only says it is a 'discovery and matching layer', which implies a read operation but does not confirm idempotency, side effects, or auth requirements. Critical behavioral traits are missing.

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 one sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It lacks structure, such as separating purpose from usage, and the 'category: platform' tag is unclear. The brevity sacrifices clarity.

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?

With 2 optional parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more context about the tool's function and return behavior. The phrase 'discovery and matching layer' is too abstract for an agent to know when or how to invoke it 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?

Input schema has 2 parameters with 100% description coverage in the schema itself. The schema's descriptions are minimal ('CLI arguments', 'Optional stdin data'). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond these, so baseline 3 applies. It does not explain how parameters relate to 'discovery and matching'.

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 states 'capability discovery and matching layer', which gives a general idea but is vague. It does not specify what capabilities are discovered or matched, nor how it differs from sibling tools like 'akai_api' or 'akai_entity'. The lack of a title and precise verb makes it adequate but not clear.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The description is purely declarative without usage hints.

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