context.inspect

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses fail-closed authentication requirements, confirms no side effects ('Does not admit tools and does not execute other tools'), and specifies conditional output based on includeEstate. This is strong behavioral disclosure.

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?

Four sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by return details, exclusions, a direct usage pointer, and the auth requirement. Every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the return contents, the conditional estate flag, the lack of side effects, and the auth constraint. It is nearly complete; only edge-case error behavior is not described, which is a minor gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some context by tying includeEstate to the estate report and showing how the returned data varies, but it largely restates what the schema already documents.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Read the current session pack and schema token-tax report.' It also explicitly differentiates itself by saying it 'does not admit tools and does not execute other tools,' and names context.need as the related sibling to compare against.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Call this before context.need to see what is already loaded.' It also clarifies what the tool does not do, helping an agent avoid using it for admission or execution. It does not explicitly address echo.ping, but the context is clear enough.

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