Get Agent Recommendation Brief

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Retrieve' weakly implies a read, but nothing states permissions, whether it triggers external web search, cost/latency, or caching behavior. The listed return contents overlap with the output schema rather than adding behavioral context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Slight redundancy in enumerating payload fields that the output schema already carries, but no wasted prose.

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?

Because an output schema exists, return values need no explanation, and all three parameters are schema-documented. Still, for a tool sitting in a dense sibling cluster, the absence of any positioning or usage cue leaves the definition only minimally complete.

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 description coverage is 100% and each parameter is clearly documented, so the baseline is 3. The description only gestures at 'domain' and says nothing about how mood_or_intent or target_location shape the brief.

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?

Specific verb 'Retrieve' plus an enumerated payload ('Taste DNA, anchor favorites, avoidances, and web search queries') makes the purpose concrete. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely related sibling get_user_taste_profile, so an agent must infer the split.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing is given. With 19 siblings including get_user_taste_profile and vet_recommendation_candidate, the definition offers nothing to help pick between them.

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