hou_tea_explain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It lists the types of information returned but does not mention that the tool is read-only or that it does not modify data. For a 'return' tool, this is sufficient but not explicit.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with a bracket marker and effectively lists key content. While not extremely concise due to the enumeration, there is no extraneous information.

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 a single required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately summarizes the output content. However, it fails to explain the parameter and does not provide any behavioral context beyond the content list.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'skill_id' parameter. It only says 'for one product' without connecting it to the parameter. The agent is left to guess that skill_id identifies the product.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and clearly states the resource (origin story, brewing guide, health benefits, etc. for one product). It distinguishes from siblings like hou_tea_browse (listing) and hou_tea_recommend (suggestions) by focusing on detailed explanation.

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?

The description implies use when detailed info on a single product is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like hou_tea_discover_extended or hou_tea_recommend. No when-not guidance is provided.

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