using_sumo_qa

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

No annotations provided, but the description explains that it triggers sub-skills and establishes global discipline, indicating its role as a router without side effects. Could mention if any state is modified, but likely none.

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 somewhat verbose with many examples, but it front-loads the critical instruction. Could be more succinct by grouping examples.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description adequately explains the tool's role as a router and lists many sub-tasks, making it complete enough for an agent to understand its function.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so description does not need to add parameter meaning. Adding parameter info would be redundant.

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: it is the mandatory entry router for all sumo-qa work, listing many example QA requests. It distinguishes itself from siblings by being the first tool to call.

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 says 'MUST be called first for any QA-shaped request' and instructs not to answer QA questions from training-data knowledge, directing to route through this tool, providing clear when and when-not to use.

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