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

With no annotations, the description explains the importance of calling this read tool to avoid failure modes. However, it doesn't explicitly mention side effects or auth, but the read-only nature is clear from 'Read everything' and the guidance to call before changes.

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 that are direct and front-loaded, with no redundant 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?

The description mentions the return contents (action items, dismissed, focus) and the workflow context, making it complete for a read tool without an output schema.

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 covers both parameters with detailed descriptions about include_rules and include_dismissed defaults and implications. The tool description does not add parameter-specific details, so baseline 3 applies.

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 tool reads action items, dismissed records, and focus terms. It uses the verb 'Read' and specifies the resource, distinguishing it from mutation siblings like add_item and put_proposal.

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 instructs to call before proposing changes, explains why (to avoid re-suggesting dismissed items), and identifies it as the only way to know what was deleted or rejected.

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