ai_qa

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions using a 'configured free LLM' and input constraints, but doesn't disclose if the operation is read-only, error handling, or rate limits. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second adds critical usage constraints. Every word is necessary; no filler. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 3 params, 1 required, no output schema, and distinct sibling tools, the description covers the core functionality and key constraint. Missing return format or error behavior, but still sufficient for a simple Q&A tool.

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 covers 100% of parameters with basic descriptions. The description adds the mutual exclusivity rule (url OR text) and the 'plain text only' restriction for the text parameter, which adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema.

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 answers a question about a URL or plain text. It uses specific verb+resource (answer a question) and distinguishes from siblings like ai_summarize or ai_translate, which are different tasks.

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 explicitly says to pass url OR text (not both) and restricts input to plain text with no code or secrets. While it doesn't compare with siblings, the constraints are clear and actionable.

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