ask_deepseek

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: network inference consumes the user's DeepSeek API quota (a cost side effect), and the model defaults to DEEPSEEK_MODEL or deepseek-flash. It also discloses that the return includes provider model metadata. Missing detail on failure/timeout behavior keeps it from a 5.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the context-scoping constraint and then the quota warning. No filler; every sentence carries information, though the phrasing spans a line break awkwardly.

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?

With no output schema, the description steps in to say the response includes provider model metadata. It covers cost, model defaults, and the fact that only the prompt is transmitted. The main gap is the undocumented timeout parameter and any error/rate-limit behavior, but for a three-parameter read-only tool this is largely complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the prompt parameter ('only prompt is sent as user context') and the model parameter (defaults to DEEPSEEK_MODEL or deepseek-flash), but says nothing about the timeout parameter or its default of 180 seconds, leaving one of three parameters fully undocumented.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get DeepSeek's independent answer in this chat, and notes it returns provider model metadata. It is clear what the tool produces, though the phrase 'independent answer in this chat' is slightly ambiguous about whether chat history is included (later clarified by 'Only prompt is sent').

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?

Usage is implied by the name and the note that only the prompt is sent as user context, which tells the agent this is a stateless single-turn query. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over answering directly, and no when-not conditions. No siblings exist, which limits the need for differentiation.

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