IBM Granite Analyze ($0.04)

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds that the tool returns structured JSON, costs $0.04 per call, and requires no account. No contradictions. It provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by cost and output format. No wasted words.

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?

The description explains return contents (entities, sentiment, etc.), compensating for lack of output schema. It also addresses pricing and authentication (no account needed). Together with sibling names, it provides sufficient context for an agent to decide to 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 100% (all parameters have descriptions). The description reinforces the tool's capabilities but does not add new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb 'extract entities, sentiment, risk signals, a concise summary, and recommended next steps', the resource 'any text', and distinguishes from siblings like ibm_granite_chat or ibm_granite_code. It is clear and specific.

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 mentions input types (contracts, reports, emails) and cost/payment method, providing context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives, though the sibling list provides implicit differentiation.

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