research

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: query decomposition, parallel source reading, synthesis, and credits consumption. Also lists return fields, offering comprehensive transparency.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, followed by usage guidance, cost, and return format. Every sentence is informative with no waste. The structure is logical and efficient.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists all return fields (query, report, sources, sub_queries, credits_used, etc.), providing complete context for what the agent will receive. The process steps are also described, making the tool's behavior fully understood.

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 coverage is 100% with good descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds the credit cost but does not elaborate on parameter behavior beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as it adds marginal value.

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 'Perform comprehensive research on a topic' and explains the process (decomposes, searches, reads, synthesizes). It distinguishes from 'search' for simple lookups, making the tool's purpose specific and unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly indicates best use ('open-ended or comparative questions') and when not to use ('simple factual lookups, use search instead'). Mentions cost (25 credits) and alternative tool with detail, providing clear guidance.

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