llm_orchestrate

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses core behavior: automatic decomposition, chaining, routing to optimal model, and tier limitations. Does not cover failure handling or auth needs, but adequate.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then details, tier info, and parameters. Slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. Could be a bit more concise.

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 output schema existence and complexity, description covers main functionality, parameters, and tier limits. Lacks explanation of output interpretation, but adequate for agent use.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage), but description adds clear meaning: 'task' is a description of the complex task, and 'template' lists specific enum-like values ('research_report', etc.). Fully compensates.

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 it does multi-step orchestration, decomposing complex tasks across multiple LLMs, and lists specific chaining steps. It distinguishes from single-step siblings like llm_analyze and llm_generate.

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 guidance on using templates vs auto-decomposition, and mentions tier limits. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools for simple tasks, but the context is clear.

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