Ask Hermes Atlas (free-form RAG)

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses the tool's behavior: it delegates to the Hermes Atlas RAG endpoint, searches across specific sources (repos, summaries, guides, ECOSYSTEM.md), and returns a cited answer. This gives the agent a clear mental model of what occurs when invoked.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds value. The first states what it does, the second gives examples and the return format. No unnecessary filler.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the input, the process, the sources searched, and the output (cited answer), making it sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to use it.

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?

The input schema only defines 'question' as a string with no description. The description compensates by explaining the parameter's purpose ('free-form natural-language question') and supplying example questions that illustrate the expected format and content.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Ask a free-form natural-language question about the Hermes Agent ecosystem.' It further distinguishes itself by mentioning the RAG endpoint and cited answers, clearly separating it from sibling tools like search_projects or get_guide.

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 provides clear context by stating it is for free-form natural-language questions and gives two concrete examples. However, it does not explicitly exclude sibling tools or state when to prefer alternatives, only implying usage through the question format.

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