ask

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it describes the multi-agent RAG pipeline (plan, retrieve, synthesize, self-critique) and notes source-citation. This goes beyond a simple claim of answering questions.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundant or unnecessary information. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter schema, output schema existence, and clear sibling differentiation, the description provides all necessary context. It covers behavior, usage constraints, and alternatives comprehensively.

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% and already describes the parameter as 'A natural-language question to answer from the knowledge base.' The tool description adds minimal extra semantic meaning, so baseline of 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 answers a question with a written, source-cited answer, distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'search'. The specific verb 'answer' and resource 'question' are well defined.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: use when the user wants an answer, and for raw matching documents use 'search'. This provides clear context and an alternative, satisfying high standards.

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