next_synthesis

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

Annotations are sparse (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false) and the description does not fill the gap. Critically, it does not say whether calling this advances a queue or reserves/locks the returned entity, despite readOnlyHint=false implying a state-affecting operation. No mention of auth, ordering, or what happens when no entity needs writing.

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?

A single tight sentence with the key payload front-loaded after the verb. No filler, though it is terse enough that a bit more procedural framing could have been added without bloat.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained in prose. However, for a workflow-step tool sitting among next_wiki_article and next_screening_batch, the description omits the state-advancing/queue behavior that an agent needs to call it safely, leaving a real gap.

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 100%, so run_id, project, and min_sources are already documented in the schema, and the description adds nothing about their semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate when structured fields carry the parameter meaning.

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 ('Get') and resource ('the next entity whose wiki page needs writing') plus the payload ('its evidence'), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It is distinguishable from list_articles or find_entities, but it never contrasts itself with the closely named sibling next_wiki_article or next_screening_batch, so sibling differentiation is incomplete.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives such as next_wiki_article or a batch flow, nor when not to call it. The agent must infer that this is a step in the synthesis workflow and has no explicit cue about sequencing or preconditions.

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