summarize_whitepaper

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 adds that the tool is asynchronous and returns a job_id/status_url, which is important behavioral context. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (none expected), rate limits, or what happens on invalid URLs.

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 two sentences long, with the first sentence capturing the core function and the second specifying the output format and async nature. Every sentence is informative, with no unnecessary words.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the key aspects: action, input, async behavior, and output format. It could be improved by noting error handling or usage limits, but it is largely sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the 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 coverage is 100% (both parameters have descriptions). The description adds 'Async, Pro tier' which is not in the schema, but does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline is 3 due to high coverage.

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 verb 'Fetch + structurally summarize' and the resource 'whitepaper URL', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It additionally specifies that it is async and for Pro tier, which differentiates it from sibling tools that may be synchronous or free.

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 mentions 'Async, Pro tier', implying it is for longer-running tasks and may require a subscription, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_article' (which might fetch but not summarize). No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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