Quick Query

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and openWorld hints. Description adds context: no file reading, no repo exploration, no session state. It confirms non-destructive behavior and provides clarity on what the tool cannot do, which is valuable beyond the annotations.

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?

Description is well-structured: brief overview, explicit exclusions, use cases, and tips. Every sentence adds value. 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?

For a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior, parameter usage, and limitations. It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly without confusion.

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 parameters are described in schema, but the description adds extra guidance: context must be inline text (not file paths), reasoningEffort levels mapped to depth, maxResponseLength as soft limit. This adds significant value beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool is a lightweight query for analysis on existing text, distinguishing it from code execution (codex), search, and other siblings. It specifies what it does not do (file reading, repo exploration, session state).

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?

Explicitly provides use cases (reviewing, critiquing, comparing) and when not to use (for code execution or file operations, use codex). Also includes tips on how to pass text and control reasoning effort.

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