DeepSeek Sub-Agent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool delegates to an external model and returns text output, which is useful. However, it does not address potential side effects, latency, cost, or error behavior, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotation support.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and ending with a clear return-value statement. Every word earns its place with no 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's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly minimal. It states the return value as text output but does not elaborate on usage patterns, error scenarios, or how parameters interact. It is adequate but leaves room for more context.

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 already documents all parameters. The tool description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('delegates') and resource ('DeepSeek V4'), clearly stating the tool's function: handling massive text processing, code generation boilerplate, or complex sub-modules to conserve Sol context tokens. This distinguishes it from general-purpose tools, even though no siblings are listed.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (for massive tasks that would otherwise consume Sol context tokens) and implies it is for offloading heavy work. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the absence of siblings makes this acceptable.

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