GenericOpenSearchApiTool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool is flexible and supports all HTTP methods, but doesn't disclose potential side effects, idempotency, or rate limits. The mention of leveraging knowledge of API documentation implies the agent must understand those details, which is acceptable for a generic tool.

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 concise with four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and uses clear language. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool is generic with no output schema, the description adequately covers its purpose, usage, and parameter expectations. It mentions leveraging the agent's API knowledge, which compensates for the lack of detailed behavior. The schema coverage is high, making the description complete enough.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description provides a high-level overview of supported components (path, method, query params, body, headers) but doesn't add significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions. The examples in the schema complement this.

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 it is for calling any OpenSearch API endpoint, lists supported HTTP methods, and distinguishes from siblings by specifying when to use it (when dedicated tools don't exist, or for more control).

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 tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Use this when you need to access OpenSearch APIs that don't have dedicated tools, or when you need more control.' This provides clear guidance and implicitly suggests using other tools when available.

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