slite_ask

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool returns an AI-generated answer with sources, implying a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, it does not detail response structure, error conditions, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The description is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence defines the action and input, the second defines the output. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information.

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 simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the main functionality. It could be improved by specifying the format of the answer or sources, but it's largely sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool does and what to expect.

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%, with clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds 'in natural language' for the question parameter, which slightly enhances meaning but is not essential. The parentNoteId parameter description in the schema is already explanatory. The description adds marginal value beyond 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's purpose: 'Ask a question to your Slite notes in natural language' with output 'Returns an AI-generated answer with sources.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like slite_search (likely returns matching notes) and slite_get_note (retrieves a specific note).

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (getting AI answers from notes). While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, the sibling tool list implies alternatives for different use cases (e.g., slite_search for literal searches). The description is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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