mt_cyber_get_guidance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get' implying read-only, but does not explicitly disclose that no data is modified, no authentication requirements, or any other behavioral traits. For a simple retrieval, this is minimally adequate but could be richer.

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 a single sentence with zero redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource, immediately informing the agent of the tool's core function.

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?

For a tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: what it does and how to specify the document. It does not describe the output format, but that is likely clear from the domain (guidance document). Adequate for the simplicity.

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 coverage is 100% with a description for the 'reference' parameter. The tool description adds examples of reference values, reinforcing the schema. No extra constraints are needed as the parameter is straightforward.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('specific CSI Malta guidance document'), and the method ('by reference'). It provides concrete examples of reference formats, distinguishing it from sibling tools like mt_cyber_search_guidance which is for searching.

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 implies usage when you have an exact document reference, with examples. It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the sibling tool names (e.g., search_guidance) provide context. Slight lack of explicit guidance holds it back from a 5.

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