check_llm_mention

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

Discloses fan-out to multiple LLMs (Perplexity, OpenAI, Gemini), reports per-model mentions and citations, and mentions cost-capping via env var. No annotations provided, so description carries the full burden.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, each sentence adds value without fluff.

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 output schema exists, the description adequately covers behavior, model selection, and cost control. Could mention error handling or output format but overall complete for the tool's complexity.

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 descriptions cover all 4 parameters (100% coverage), and the description adds context about default models and cost-capping, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it checks whether a brand surfaces in LLM answers to a query, specifying the fan-out to multiple LLMs and reporting mentions and citations. This distinguishes it from siblings like audit_ai_visibility and check_ai_bot_access.

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?

Implies usage for brand mention checking but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, no exclusions or prerequisites.

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