get_sentiment_analysis

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

The description discloses that the tool consumes AI credits, which is a cost implication. However, with no annotations, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, authorization needs, or other side effects. It also does not clarify the relationship between 'phone' and 'conversation analysis'.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and output. The unclear '[query]' is a minor flaw.

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?

With 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain parameter interactions, output format (JSON?), or how the tool processes conversations given the required phone parameter.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for its 8 parameters, so the description adds little beyond the schema. It lists output fields but does not explain how parameters like 'summary_type' or 'tone' affect the analysis.

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 analyzes sentiment and intent of a customer conversation using AI, and lists the return fields. However, the mention of '[query]' at the end is ambiguous and the required parameter is 'phone', not a query, causing slight confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_sentiment_trend' or 'get_ai_summary'. The description does not specify prerequisites or alternatives.

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