Browse Pool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden for behavioral traits. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned (e.g., paginated list), or any side effects. The term 'browse' implies non-destructive, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with key information. However, it could be slightly more efficient by integrating the filtering support into the first sentence. Overall, every sentence serves a purpose.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain the response format or pagination behavior. It mentions filtering and search but not how results are structured (e.g., list of items, pagination details). Adequate but incomplete.

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 has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for each of the 7 optional parameters. The description only adds a general statement ('Supports filtering and search'), adding no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 browses the marketplace/pool and lists discoverable items (bots, tools, knowledge bases, reflections). It distinguishes from many sibling tools by focusing on browsing the shared pool, but does not explicitly differentiate from 'neuron_browse_list_pool' (likely a sibling with similar purpose).

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'neuron_browse_list_pool' or search tools. It only states 'Supports filtering and search' without advising on conditions or alternatives.

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