cohere_chat

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It reveals the tool is for chat and supports preamble and history, but does not disclose whether it is read-only/read-write, authentication needs, rate limits, or any side effects. The api_key in schema implies auth, but the description omits this.

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 contains no extraneous information. Every sentence is meaningful.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, expected behavior with chat_history, or how to format the system preamble. It lacks sufficient context for an agent to use it effectively without relying heavily on the schema.

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 71% (5 of 7 params documented). The description adds context by highlighting 'system preamble' and 'conversation history', which clarifies the purpose of those parameters. However, it does not compensate for the undocumented max_tokens and temperature parameters, and adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the other params.

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 clearly states 'Chat with a Cohere Command model,' which is a specific verb+resource. It also mentions support for system preamble and conversation history. However, it does not differentiate from other chat tools like openai_chat_completion or sibling Cohere tools like cohere_generate, beyond the provider name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cohere_generate or other chat completion tools. It does not specify scenarios, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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