respond_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool comments and closes the request, unblocks the asking session, and has a security constraint. It could mention error cases (e.g., invalid session), but overall provides good behavioral context.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, and no wasted words. Every sentence adds essential information.

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 the presence of an output schema and only two simple parameters, the description covers the core functionality and a key security constraint. It could mention what happens on success or failure, but it is largely complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'request_id' and 'answer' implicitly (answer is a comment) but provides no additional meaning such as format, length, or allowed values for the string parameters.

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 verb 'answer' and the resource 'info-request', and explains the action of commenting and closing. It distinguishes from siblings like 'request_info' and 'poll_inbox' by specifying the context of answering a request.

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 description provides a clear constraint ('Only the session the request is assigned to may answer it') and explains the security reason. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the constraint is explicit enough for usage guidance.

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