Ask Company Brain

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It minimally states it queries local Markdown knowledge but omits details on return format, pagination, error handling, or what happens if the query fails. The placeholder note undermines trust in its current behavior.

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 short with two sentences. The first sentence is concise and front-loaded, but the second sentence (placeholder note) is not directly useful for tool selection, slightly reducing efficiency.

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 lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, limitations, or usage examples, leaving the agent with insufficient information to invoke the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description does not explain any of the 4 parameters. It mentions 'question' implicitly but provides no context for 'tags', 'limit', or 'client', leaving the agent without guidance on how to set them meaningfully.

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 'Ask a business question over local Markdown knowledge,' specifying the verb and resource, which differentiates it from sibling tools (ingestion/saving operations). However, the 'Placeholder until GBrain retrieval is wired' caveat slightly reduces clarity as it indicates the tool is temporary.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify any prerequisites or exclusions.

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