corpus_info

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

The description explicitly says 'Read', which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds valuable context about what specific corpus information is being read (coverage, topics, cutoff, mode), going beyond the annotation's simple read-only designation.

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 a single concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's function and timing. No filler or redundant information is present.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It provides sufficient context about what the tool reads and when to use it, making it complete for its purpose.

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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline score of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose rather than parameter details.

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 action (Read) and the specific resource (corpus) with explicit attributes (coverage, topics, cutoff, synthetic/live mode). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_theses or search_research_reports by focusing on corpus metadata rather than content retrieval.

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 phrase 'before research' provides a clear temporal usage context, indicating this tool should be used as a preliminary step. While it does not explicitly name alternative tools, the instruction to read corpus information before conducting research implies when to use this tool versus other search/list tools.

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