Loading ToolBench
Server provides 3 tools with explicit Zod schemas and descriptions. Tool naming follows verb-noun convention (googleSearch, chat, analyzeFile). All tools have input schemas with typed parameters. However, descriptions are generic and lack context for when/why to use tools. Parameter descriptions are present but lack validation guidance, constraints, and examples. No output schema documentation. Error handling is minimal, no recovery guidance or actionable error messages. Missing idempotency markers and risk classification in descriptions.
Analyzes the specified file (image, text, or PDF) using gemini-cli.
Engages in a chat conversation with gemini-cli.
Performs a Google search using gemini-cli and returns structured results.
Tool descriptions lack actionable context. 'Engages in a chat conversation with gemini-cli' does not explain WHEN to use this vs googleSearch or analyzeFile, WHAT it returns, or what prerequisites exist (e.g., requires Google login via gemini-cli).
No output schema documentation. Callers cannot predict response structure. For example, googleSearch executes gemini-cli and returns raw stdout without documenting whether it returns JSON, plain text, or mixed formats. This forces LLMs to guess field names for downstream calls.
Parameter descriptions lack validation constraints. 'The search query' does not specify: min/max length, character restrictions, whether special characters are allowed, or supported languages. LLMs will pass unbounded strings; gemini-cli may reject them silently.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | F | 46 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | F | 43 | - | v1 |
No error handling guidance. If gemini-cli fails (e.g., authentication timeout, rate limit, model unavailable), the tool returns a raw Error with code and stderr. LLMs cannot determine: can this be retried? Should the user re-authenticate? Is it a transient network error?
Missing risk classification in descriptions. 'googleSearch' is marked as READ_ONLY in source, but the description does not state this. Agents should know which tools are safe to invoke speculatively vs. which modify state. No idempotency hints either.
The 'model' parameter accepts a free-form string but only documents two examples ('gemini-2.5-pro', 'gemini-2.5-flash'). LLMs may hallucinate other model names. Should be an enum: ['gemini-2.5-pro', 'gemini-2.5-flash', ...], or a constrained pattern with format guidance.
No dependency hints. For example, analyzeFile requires an 'absolute path' but does not specify: does it accept file:// URIs? Remote paths? Relative paths resolved from current working directory? Can the tool access all files on the system, or are there sandbox restrictions?
The 'sandbox' and 'yolo' parameters are duplicated across all three tools. These appear to be server-level options (gemini-cli command-line flags), not per-tool variations. Should be promoted to server configuration, not tool parameters, to reduce cognitive load.