get_context_delta

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation without detailing side effects, safety (e.g., read-only), or edge cases (e.g., behavior if prior_as_of is after current). This is insufficient for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and a key usage note, earning its place without fluff.

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, the return values are documented elsewhere. However, the tool compares snapshots and the description lacks details on comparison semantics, error conditions, or the nature of 'notable_shifts.' While minimally viable, it could be more complete given the tool's complexity.

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 clarifies that prior_as_of is required and current_as_of can be omitted for the latest bundle. However, it does not explain 'scope' (default 'daily') or 'assets' (list of strings), leaving the agent to guess their purpose and valid values.

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's purpose: 'Compare two ContextBundle snapshots and return notable_shifts.' This is a specific verb (Compare) and resource (ContextBundle snapshots), and it distinguishes itself from siblings like get_context_at (which retrieves a single snapshot) and get_context_bundle (which fetches a bundle).

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 guidance on required vs optional parameters: 'prior_as_of is required; omit current_as_of for latest live bundle.' This helps the agent understand how to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives.

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