9router embeddings

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

Annotations are all false and provide minimal behavioral signal. The description adds one useful trait: 'Shape varies by host,' which warns the agent that output structure is not consistent. However, it does not disclose whether this is a read operation, if it has side effects, or what 'host' means. With annotations providing little, the description carries some burden but only partially meets it.

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 is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It contains two terse sentences that omit essential details. While it is front-loaded with the core action, it fails to provide enough substance to be considered appropriately sized.

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?

The tool has an output schema, but the description does not clarify the output format beyond 'shape varies by host,' which is vague. It lacks guidance on input handling, model selection, and expected behavior. Given the minimal description and low parameter coverage, the description is incomplete for an agent to call this correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining the parameters (model, texts), but it does not. It mentions 'texts' implicitly in 'Embed texts' but gives no format, constraints, or meaning of the model parameter. This is a critical gap for a tool with 2 parameters.

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?

States a specific verb (embed) and resource (texts), clearly indicating this is an embeddings tool. It distinguishes from siblings like nine_chat and nine_image because it is the only embeddings tool, but it does not mention what embeddings are for or how they relate to other nine_* 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only says 'Embed texts' with no context on use cases, prerequisites, or why an agent might choose this over other nine_* tools. The 'Shape varies by host' hint is a behavioral note, not usage guidance.

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