ai_query_assistant

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, side-effect-free, requires authentication, or has rate limits. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and fails to give any transparency about what happens during execution or what the response contains.

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 concise, consisting of a single sentence, which is appropriately short for a simple query tool. However, it is overly minimal, lacking any additional structure or detail that could help an agent. It is not verbose, but it under-specifies the tool's behavior and context.

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 three parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (though its content is unknown), the description provides insufficient context for correct invocation. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or usage scenarios, making it incomplete for an agent to reliably select and use the tool.

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%, and the description does not compensate for the lack of parameter explanations. It does not clarify the meaning of 'query_text', 'assistant_id', or 'max_results' beyond the raw schema. The description fails to add any semantic value to the parameters.

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 clear verb-resource pair: 'Query an assistant for recommendations.' It indicates the tool queries an assistant to obtain recommendations, which is specific enough. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like ai_get_recommendations, which likely serves a similar purpose, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions. It does not mention how it relates to ai_list_assistants or ai_get_recommendations, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate usage scenario.

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