Queue Project Analysis

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

Disclosures background execution, immediate job id return, and polling/stopping with other tools. Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive; description adds async behavior and interaction pattern.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with core action and return value. No wasted words.

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?

Sufficient for a complex batch async tool: covers purpose, return, and references sibling tools. Lacks error handling or input validation details, but acceptable for this complexity level.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. Description adds minimal extra meaning beyond contextualizing projectId and documents; 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?

Clearly states the action: enqueue a background batch analysis across many documents, return job id. Distinguishes from siblings by mentioning queue_document_analysis and analyze_document for single documents.

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 (whole manuscript or large set) and when not (single document, prefer alternatives). Provides clear context for selection.

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