cohere_generate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'generate text completions', missing key traits like authentication requirements (api_key), rate limits, or whether it maintains conversational state. The agent cannot infer important behavior.

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 concise sentence of 6 words, which is efficient. However, it sacrifices information for brevity; a bit more detail would improve clarity without harming 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 6 parameters, no output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description is too brief. It does not cover key aspects like required authentication, parameter roles, or return format, leaving the agent with insufficient context for correct invocation.

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 only 33% (model and stop_sequences have descriptions). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema. For low coverage, the description should compensate but fails to explain api_key, prompt, max_tokens, or temperature.

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 the verb 'generate' and resource 'text completions', and specifies the model family 'Cohere Command'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cohere_chat and cohere_classify by focusing on completion rather than chat or classification, but does not explicitly contrast them.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool instead of siblings like cohere_chat or cohere_rerank. No context about prerequisites or appropriate scenarios is given.

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