ask_ava_streaming

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

The description contradicts the annotation destructiveHint=true by presenting the tool as a harmless Q&A interface. It fails to disclose any destructive side effects or explain the meaning of the destructive hint. Annotation contradiction is flagged.

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 brief with two sentences, front-loading the purpose. It communicates the essential information without superfluous text. The structure is appropriate for a tool with few parameters.

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 and the streaming nature, the description should provide more context on event handling, error conditions, or how to process the SSE stream. The description is minimal and does not fully compensate for the missing output schema or the unusual destructive hint.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides, though it does hint at the customerContext usage indirectly. No improvement over 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 is for interacting with Ava via streaming SSE responses. It specifies the action (send a question) and the resource (Ava, DoiT's AI assistant). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool ask_ava_sync, relying on the word 'streaming' to hint at the difference.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ask_ava_sync. The description does not mention prerequisites, context for choosing streaming over sync, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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