consult_gemini

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that the query is 'forwarded verbatim to the CLI', explains optional parameters (model, timeout), and describes the return value as 'Gemini's response text or an explanatory error string'. This provides sufficient behavioral context for a query 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 well-structured with Args/Returns sections and no extraneous content. It is concise but includes necessary parameter details. Minor tightening could improve it, but overall effective.

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 moderate complexity (4 params, 2 required) and presence of an output schema (implied by return description), the description covers the key behavioral aspects. It explains inputs, optional overrides, and return value, making it complete enough for effective use.

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 0% description coverage, so the description carries the burden. It explains all four parameters: query (prompt text), directory (working directory), model (optional alias or ID), timeout_seconds (per-call override). This adds meaning beyond the schema's raw type definitions.

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 'Send a query directly to the Gemini CLI', specifying the verb (send) and resource (Gemini CLI). The name 'consult_gemini' and sibling tools 'consult_gemini_with_files' and 'web_search' help distinguish its purpose as a direct query without file context.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool vs. 'consult_gemini_with_files' or 'web_search'. It only implies usage for direct queries without files, lacking alternative guidance.

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