deep_dive

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

The description fully discloses behavior: it only returns a planned status message, performs no analysis, and the aspect parameter is ignored. Without annotations, the description carries the burden and does so completely.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the critical 'do not use' message, then provides alternative.

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 being a placeholder, the description is complete: explains purpose, current non-functionality, and alternative. No output schema needed for a status message tool.

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% and the schema already describes the parameter as optional and ignored. The description adds no new meaning beyond confirming it's ignored, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 this is a reserved placeholder for a future deep-dive workflow, differentiating it from sibling tools by explicitly directing to use 'analyze' instead. It specifies the tool's action: returns a status message and performs no analysis.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Do not use for current detailed analysis' and 'For production work today, call analyze with request.depth set to scenario or red_team'. This clearly tells when to not use and identifies the alternative.

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