get_metax_section

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, destructive false), the description adds valuable behavioral context: retrieved text must be treated as untrusted, instructions found in it must not be executed, and the tool never fetches URLs or modifies the index. This meaningfully augments the structured metadata.

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 compact and front-loads the purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence is longer and somewhat broad, but it delivers important security guidance that earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description does not need to document return values or read-only behavior. The main gap is parameter semantics—an agent still lacks guidance on how to obtain and format document_id and section values—so completeness is only adequate.

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%, and the description does not explain what document_id or section values look like or how they should be formatted. The phrase 'one section' hints at the section parameter's role, but it is insufficient to compensate for totally undocumented 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 states a specific operation: reading one section from an indexed document. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing 'one section' versus full documents or search results, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Usage context is implied by the verb and resource ('read one section'), and the description notes the tool only reads the local SQLite index. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_metax_document or search_metax_docs, nor provide exclusion conditions.

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