Forensics Query

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

The annotations already disclose that the tool is not read-only, is open-world, non-idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context about a paid remote route and exact price, but it does not explain why it is non-read-only or what side effects/payment flow an agent should expect.

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 text is brief, but it wastes space repeating the title and gives opaque transport/payment details while omitting essential purpose and parameter information. It is under-specified rather than effectively concise.

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?

Although an output schema exists and safety-relevant annotations are present, the description leaves the tool's core operation and both input parameters entirely unclear. For a paid open-world forensic query with opaque inputs, this is not complete enough for correct invocation.

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 schema has two parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description never mentions 'entries' or 'actor_did'. An agent gets no semantic guidance for either parameter.

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 largely repeats the title 'Forensics Query' and adds only a remote route and payment detail. It does not explain what evidence is being queried, what the operation does, or how it differs from the many sibling evidence/audit tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling tools are alternatives. Given the large number of related evidence and attestation tools, this omission is significant.

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