testneo_ai_assistant_query

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

Without annotations, description discloses it uses Web AI chat quota, mirrors UI behavior, and accepts optional recommend_context / rag_context for document-aware answers. Does not cover output format or error behavior, but provides reasonable transparency.

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?

Three sentences with front-loaded purpose, followed by usage and optional features. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, but description lacks return value information. Only covers about half of the 9 parameters, leaving nested objects (recommend_context, rag_context) unexplained. Incomplete given complexity.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage). Description adds meaning to context_id, context_name_query, recommend_context, rag_context, and the scoping rule. But omits context_match_mode, response_style, prefer_context_id, and doesn't detail nested objects. Partial coverage.

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 it is a natural-language Q&A tool over a project, same as the product UI, and optionally scoped to unified context. It uniquely identifies its purpose among siblings, which lack a similar Q&A tool.

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 on when to pass context_id or context_name_query (scoped questions) versus omitting both (project-wide questions). Mentions quota usage. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context scoping is well covered.

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