research-synthesis

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

With no annotations, description must disclose behavior. It mentions AI-synthesized, parallel aggregation, and output structure (executive summary, key findings, etc.) and cost. However, it doesn't mention failure modes, latency, or what happens if some sources fail. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Description is a single paragraph with some marketing language ('20% below nearest competitor'). While front-loaded with purpose, it could be more concise. Every sentence adds value but the cost comparison is extraneous for tool selection.

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?

No output schema, so description compensates by listing output sections (executive summary, key findings, etc.). Two parameters with full schema coverage. Function is well-covered. Missing details like authentication or rate limits but not critical for core functionality.

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 both parameters have descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the query parameter can be omitted for default, giving an example, and explaining focus narrows the analytical lens. This goes beyond the schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states it aggregates multiple sources (Hacker News, OpenAlex, Reddit, arXiv, DuckDuckGo) in parallel and distills into a structured report. Specific verb 'synthesizes' and resource 'intelligence report'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like reddit-intel, arxiv-intel, hn-search which focus on single sources.

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 when to use: pass ?query for targeted research or omit for default AI agents report. Includes pricing and competitor comparison but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives among siblings. Still clear enough for an agent to decide.

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