searchatlas_orchestrator

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read/write operation, what happens during routing (e.g., agent selection logic), response format, or any constraints like rate limits. The description adds minimal context beyond the basic coordination concept.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Multi-agent coordinator') and immediately explains its function. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a coordination tool with 4 parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what happens after routing (e.g., returns agent response, triggers execution), success/failure conditions, or how it interacts with the listed sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 4 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying 'queries' map to the 'message' parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose as a 'multi-agent coordinator' that 'routes queries to the best specialized agent', specifying the verb (routes) and resource (queries). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning agent types (SEO, content, PPC), but doesn't explicitly name which sibling tools it routes to versus those that might be standalone.

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 implies usage when needing specialized agent routing, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like direct agent tools (e.g., searchatlas_seo). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context somewhat vague.

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