pplx_gpt55

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly states that using this tool incurs a cost (1 Pro search query) and requires a Max subscription. This adds valuable context beyond the schema, but it does not disclose other traits like rate limits, idempotency, or whether it modifies state.

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 very short with two sentences, front-loading the model identity and then conveying critical cost/subscription info. No wasted words, but it could potentially combine ideas more efficiently.

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 has three parameters and a large set of sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain parameter semantics, provide usage examples, or differentiate from alternatives. An output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 should compensate, but it provides no information about the three parameters (query, source_focus, conversation_id). The agent cannot infer what these parameters mean or how to use them from the description alone.

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 identifies the tool as 'GPT-5.5 — OpenAI's latest model' but lacks a verb stating its action (e.g., 'generate', 'answer'). Purpose is implied by model name but not explicit, and the description does not distinguish from similar models like pplx_gpt54 or thinking variants.

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 mentions cost and subscription requirement ('COSTS 1 PRO SEARCH QUERY. Requires Max subscription'), providing some context for when not to use it. However, it offers no guidance on when to prefer this over sibling tools like pplx_gpt54, pplx_gpt55_thinking, or pplx_smart_query.

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