HIP-4 Outcome Summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by disclosing the auth requirement and specifying exactly what data will be returned, which helps an agent set expectations.

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 filler. The main action and resource are front-loaded, the returned fields are listed compactly, and the access requirement is appended without disrupting the core message.

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 only two parameters and complete schema descriptions, the description gives everything an agent needs: the resource scope, the returned fields, and the access requirement. Although there is no output schema, the field list effectively documents the return shape.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents outcomeId and useToonFormat. The description does not add new parameter-level meaning; it only restates the high-level purpose, which aligns with the baseline score of 3 for complete schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the exact resource ('HIP-4 summary for one outcome'), and enumerates the included metrics, making the tool's function clear. It differentiates from most sibling tools by emphasizing 'across both sides' and 'full summary', but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the closely named hip4_outcome sibling.

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 when to use this tool—whenever a full HIP-4 outcome summary is needed—and gives a clear access prerequisite ('Starter-or-higher key'). However, it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which alternative sibling tools might be more appropriate for related but different queries.

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