pull_content

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

No annotations provided, so description fully covers behavioral traits: requires Bearer token, unauthenticated returns 401, metered charge ($0.001–$0.25), transaction logged for royalty distribution, and returns full content with provenance 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?

Concise single paragraph with front-loaded purpose, followed by usage guidelines and behavioral details. Every sentence provides necessary information 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is quite complete: explains auth, cost, logging, return content. Could mention error cases (e.g., invalid pocket_id), but overall covers the essential context.

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 (100% coverage), but description adds value: pocket_id format (24-char hex) and source (from search/list), query is optional natural language focus. These details help agent use parameters correctly.

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?

Clearly states 'Pull licensed creator content from a specific pocket by ID', using a specific verb and resource. Distinctly differentiates from siblings by noting that browsing/discovery should use search_pockets or list_pockets.

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 provides use cases (retrieving verified content for generation, RAG, training) and explicitly states when NOT to use (browsing/discovery) with alternative tool names. Also mentions authentication requirement.

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