appflowy_chat_ask

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

Notes non-streaming synchronous behavior and return values (question message id and AI answer). No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; it covers key behavioral traits but omits potential side effects or error handling.

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 succinct sentences front-load the purpose, then provide a critical prerequisite. No unnecessary words, highly efficient.

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?

Adequately covers the core function for a simple tool, but lacks details on response structure and parameter specifics. With no output schema, more description would improve completeness.

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 0%, yet description only vaguely hints at parameters ('in an existing chat'). Does not elaborate on format, constraints, or relationships between workspace_id, chat_id, and question for an AI agent.

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?

Describes a specific action: ask a question in an existing chat, non-streaming, returning both question message id and AI answer. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like appflowy_create_chat, appflowy_list_chat_messages, etc.

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 states prerequisite: 'Create a chat first with appflowy_create_chat.' Provides clear context for use, though no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives. Still strong enough for an agent.

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