sc:select-tool

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

No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, auth needs, rate limits). The tool's behavior is completely opaque beyond being 'guidance'.

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 plus parenthetical – very concise. However, it lacks structure and detail, leading to ambiguity. Conciseness without completeness does not fully serve the agent.

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, no annotations, and 3 parameters with one required, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the tool's return value or how it integrates with siblings. Many siblings require more context to distinguish.

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 no extra meaning to the parameters beyond the schema's own minimal descriptions (e.g., flags listed). It does not explain how parameters combine or affect tool behavior.

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 states 'tool selection and optimization guidance' but the verb is implicit. It does not clearly specify the action performed (e.g., 'selects' or 'recommends'). The category 'meta' hints at a meta-tool, but purpose remains vague compared to siblings.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. The priority 'RECOMMENDED' and category 'meta' are mentioned but not contextualized. No when-not-to-use or alternatives provided.

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