Yorai chat completion

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add real behavioral facts: it consumes credits, does not stream, and returns OpenAI chat.completion format. It omits permissions/auth requirements, rate limits, and failure modes, so a calling agent still lacks several operational details.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key constraints and cost note. Nothing is wasted and no filler precedes the substance.

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?

For a 4-parameter inference call with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers format, cost, and non-streaming behavior but leaves the parameter semantics undocumented and gives no sense of return shape beyond a format name.

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 and largely does not. It hints that a model is selected from the Yorai catalog (implying the default-model behavior) but says nothing about messages structure, max_tokens, or temperature ranges.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: run a text chat model from the Yorai catalog. The parenthetical narrows the scope (no streaming, text only) and distinguishes it from job/file-oriented siblings, though it doesn't name an alternative for streaming or multimodal needs.

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 constraint list (chat completions, no streaming, text only), which tells an agent what this tool is not for. But there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus siblings such as yorai_quote, yorai_create_job, or yorai_list_models for model discovery.

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