deepseek_reasoner

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden. It discloses the core behaviors (invokes R1, returns reasoning and answer, supports session continuation), but omits potential operational details like latency, cost, or rate limits. Still, it adequately conveys the primary behavior for an AI tool.

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, focused sentence that conveys the main action, output, and session capability without unnecessary words. It is concise and well-structured.

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 simple invocation and 100% schema coverage, the description covers the essential purpose and return format even without an output schema. It leaves out only minor details that are well-handled by the schema.

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%, so the baseline applies. The description adds only a brief mention of session_key continuation, but the schema already documents this parameter in detail. No additional parameter meaning is provided.

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 specifies a specific verb (call), a specific resource (DeepSeek-Reasoner R1 model), and a precise action (deep reasoning) with its output (full reasoning process and final answer). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing the reasoning capability.

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 implies usage for deep reasoning tasks and mentions session support, which gives clear context. However, it does not explicitly reference sibling tools or state when NOT to use it, leaving some ambiguity compared to deepseek_chat.

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