query_reference

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that research evidence is time-bounded and results include dataset labels, providing context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action. No redundant information, but could be slightly more efficient.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return values. It mentions dataset labels and time-bounded evidence but not full structure. Adequate but not fully complete given the search 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 has 2 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description mentions searched content but does not explain the 'query' parameter format or 'limit' semantics. More detail is needed for a tool with no schema descriptions.

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 tool searches page-level references from a specific wiki and research dataset, specifying what is searched (titles, sections, URLs, links). It distinguishes from siblings like search and get_encyclopedia_entry.

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 implies usage for finding wiki references but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. It mentions time-bound research evidence, which is a guideline, but lacks when-not-to-use or sibling differentiation.

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