trace_lineage_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to explain the recursive traversal mechanism, what constitutes 'foundational sources', or that the operation is read-only. It states the goal but not the behavioral characteristics like output structure or stopping conditions.

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 single sentence is efficiently structured and front-loaded with the action verb. Every phrase serves a purpose, though the extreme brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions. No filler or redundant text is present.

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 simple parameters and an existing output schema, the description is minimally viable but incomplete. It adequately conveys the core lineage tracing concept but lacks necessary detail on the depth limiting behavior and traversal specifics.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by implying 'scroll_id' ('of a scroll') but completely omits explanation of 'max_depth', which controls the traversal limit. The critical behavioral parameter is undocumented beyond its presence in the schema.

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 the specific verb 'Trace' and identifies the resource ('scroll') and scope ('full citation chain', 'foundational sources'), clearly indicating backward lineage traversal. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_citations_tool through the 'full chain' language, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_citations_tool or get_references_tool, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The phrase 'full citation chain' implies deep traversal but does not establish clear usage boundaries.

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