PM Playbook

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds that it has 'no side effects', is 'deterministic', and describes the content of the guide. This goes beyond annotations by detailing what the guide contains and how it behaves, with no contradictions.

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?

Single paragraph, front-loaded with purpose and usage. The description is concise but slightly lengthy due to listing guide contents. Every sentence adds value, though some could be tighter. Still, it is well-structured.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the return value (plain text guide), determinism, and a high-level summary of content. Rich annotations cover behavioral aspects. No further information is needed.

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?

Input schema has no parameters (100% coverage). The description briefly states 'No arguments', which is sufficient. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and no additional parameter semantics are needed or provided.

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 returns an operating guide for PM on AIOProductOS, a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being deterministic, having no arguments, and being a 'first call' prerequisite.

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 says 'Call it FIRST, before planning or prioritising', providing clear when-to-use. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use, but the 'FIRST' implies it is a prerequisite. No explicit alternative naming, but context with siblings suggests it loads rules assumed by others.

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