specir_resolve

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what happens on lookup failure, whether it is idempotent, or any error behavior. The brief phrasing leaves too much implicit for a tool with no annotation safety net.

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, front-loaded sentence that is easy to parse. It avoids fluff, though it may be too terse for the tool's complexity. Still, it earns high marks for conciseness.

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, zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and only a minimal description, it is inadequate. The output schema helps with return values, but parameter usage, edge cases, and selection criteria are missing, making this incomplete for an agent to reliably invoke.

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 adds almost no parameter detail. It mentions kinds of entities but does not explain the 'kind' and 'id' parameters or the 'spec' parameter's role. With three parameters and no schema descriptions, this is a critical gap.

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 states a specific action ('Resolve') and the target resource types ('exact domain entity, section, table, or figure'). This gives a clear sense of the tool's purpose and distinguishes it somewhat from siblings like 'search' by emphasizing exactness, though 'resolve' vs 'fetch' remains ambiguous.

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 word 'exact' implies this tool should be used when you have a precise identifier rather than when you need exploratory search, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions. There is no when-not guidance or reference to sibling tools.

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