adult_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, what 'adult content' means or how it is determined, or what the response format is (e.g., boolean, score, or label). The verb 'Check' hints at a read-only operation, but this is not made explicit.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately conveys the core action and input.

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 absence of annotations and an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns and how to interpret the result. It does not mention the return type or semantics (e.g., true/false, safe/unsafe), leaving a critical gap for an agent that needs to act on the result.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the single 'query' parameter, so the description must compensate. It identifies the parameter as the 'search term' to be checked, which adds useful meaning beyond the bare schema name, but it does not specify format constraints or examples. For a single string parameter, this is minimally adequate.

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 ('Check') and resource ('search term is adult content'), making the tool's purpose clear. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling search_* tools by being a classification check rather than a search operation, though it does not explicitly name siblings or contrast with them.

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, when not to use it, or any prerequisites. The agent must infer that it should be called before a search to filter adult content, but this is not stated.

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