One request

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses synchronous execution, immediate return, and the difference between raw_results and a formatted resultString. It also explains the structure of the options array. It does not mention error handling or side effects, but for a parse tool this is reasonable coverage.

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 concise and front-loaded. The first sentence states the action and result. The following sentences and bullet-like lines are well-structured and each adds necessary detail without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of a fully described schema, the description adequately covers the core use case, output format, and relationship to add_task. It does not mention error handling or edge cases, but the synchronous single-parse scope makes this acceptable.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly describing the result of raw_results=true/false (naming 'results' and 'resultString') and by giving the exact shape of each options override ({type:'override', id, value}). This goes beyond the schema's generic 'Per-request parameter overrides.'

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 the tool's function: 'Run a single parse synchronously and return the result immediately.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from add_task by contrasting one-off lookups with batch processing.

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 usage guidance is provided: 'Best for one-off lookups... For many queries or saved output files, use add_task instead.' This names the alternative tool and specifies when not to use it, giving clear decision criteria.

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